The recent instance of invoking sedition laws in several instances has again raised questions on the undemocratic nature and validity of these laws in the present constitutional democracy. It's unfortunate that these rules have survived colonial rule. The application of sedition laws by various Indian courts illustrates how outmoded they have become for today's culture, and numerous recommendations are given for their application. The Fundamental Right to Freedom of Expression and Speech is guaranteed to all inhabitants of a democratic society like India. Although the law of sedition is legal when such rights are limited, the breadth of such a rule is a serious concern. In our country, where the rule of law reigns supreme, arbitrary charges of sedition is an act that runs counter to constitutionalism. This paper is an attempt in trace down the history of this draconian English law

INTRODUCTION

Sedition was brought in by the British raj to quell protest and quieten criticism. Life imprisonment was awarded to those who spoke against governmental actions. This law was amended after independence which is more stringent than the old one. Recently the Hon, Supreme Court underscored the need to reviews s.124(A)IPC was brought into force in colonial India on 1860 but there was no section containing sedition. Later it was introduced in 1870 on the ground that it was dropped from original IPC draft by mistake,

TRACING DOWN THE HISTORY

Law of sedition was used to muzzle nationalist voices and demands for freedom. Many nationalist leaders like Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Mahatma Gandhi, Bhagat Singh and Jawaharlal Nehru were accused of sedition. Bal Gangadhar Tilak was the first to get arrested for this offence accused of foiling Government’s effort at curbing the plague epidemic in India. The nine-member jury of Bombay High court in 1897 punished him with an 18-month imprisonment. In Niharendu Dutt Majumdar Vs King Emperor, Federal court held that reasonable anticipation or likelihood of public disorder is the gist of the offence. This was again overturned by Privy Council in King Emperor Vs Sadashiv Narayan Bhaleran in 1970. The court also stated Tilak’s case and said that incitement to violence is not a Pre – requisite for crime of sedition and that excitement of feelings of enmity of govt is very much sufficient to establish govt

After the deliberate discussions of the constituent assembly with the move for Amendment from K.M Munshi dropped the word “Sedition”. Even though the word disappeared from constitution when it was adopted s.124A continued to stay in Indian Penal Code. Then On 1951, Jawaharlal Nehru brought in the first amendment of constitution to limit freedom under article 19(1)(a) and article 19(2) to empower state put curbs in form of reasonable restrictions on right to free speech

It was Indira Gandhi’ s government that made section 124 A a cognizable offence for the first time in the new code of criminal procedure 1973, which came into force in 1979 and repealed the colonial era 1898 CrPC which made sedition a cognizable offence authorising the police to make arrests without a warrant.In 1951, Punjab high court in Tara Singh Gopi Chand Vs State of Punjab said that sedition is putting restriction on the very basic fundamental right to speech and expression. This prompted Jawaharlal Nehru to introduce new grounds on which right to free speech and expression could be reasonably restricted. Then in Debi Soren Vs State of Patna upheld the validity of Section 124 A stating that the law doesn’t violate Article 19. In the case of Ram Nandan Vs State, the Allahabad high court declared Section 124A unconstitutional four years later, and held that the administration must be ready to face a strong opposition apart from popular approval or disapproval.

PRESENT SCENARIO

Cases of sedition and under has increased in 2019, according to data from the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), but only 3% of sedition cases resulted in convictions. Over the previous year, the number of sedition cases increased by 25%, and the number of arrests increased by 41%. In 2019, 93 cases of sedition were reported, with 96 arrests and 76 charge sheets, compared to 70 cases, 56 arrests, and 27 charge sheets the previous year.

One of the most fundamental legal concerns with the sedition statute is its lack of clarity. The terms "incite to hatred or contempt" and "attempt to arouse disaffection" can be interpreted in a multitude of ways, allowing the police and government to harass those on the other side of the fence who are innocent. The police can use sedition law to falsely accuse people since it does not specify which acts are seditious and provides a broad definition of what can be regarded as seditious. The police's hasty filing of sedition prosecutions confines an individual in a process with far-reaching societal and psychological ramifications.. In a three-part series on sedition cases in Karnataka, Article 14 examined the consequences of unlawful arrests in sedition cases, including lost jobs and schooling, debt accumulation, and social estrangement.

Justice D.Y. Chandrachud recently raised this point while blocking the Andhra Pradesh government from taking action against two Telugu news networks charged with sedition under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). "Everything cannot be seditious," Justice Chandrachud said. It's past time to define what constitutes sedition." "Expression of views that are dissenting and different from the government's perspective cannot be tolerated," Justice Chandrachud observed in another major case (a PIL filed against Farooq Abdullah, the former Chief Minister of Jammu & Kashmir). Similarly, the Delhi High Court's judgement in the Disha Ravi case said unequivocally that the government cannot throw citizens "behind bars merely because they chose to disagree with state policy" and that "the offence of sedition cannot be utilised to minister to governments' wounded vanity." These court findings obviously differ from the executive's understanding of the sedition legislation, demonstrating how the law is being abused indiscriminately by them. The right to free speech and expression is a hallmark of democracy, but it is under threat because to the sedition statute. Citizens must actively participate in debates and offer constructive criticism of government policies in a democracy. The executive branch of the government, on the other hand, has been authorised by the sedition laws to use the ambiguously worded clause as a tool to regulate public opinion and indiscriminately wield authority.

CONCLUSION

The sedition legislation has become a tool for instilling in citizens a sense of cooperation with government policies. Many times, the government has utilised the sedition statute to silence protesting voices in order to defend its own interests. The arrests of NDTV journalist Vinod Dua for criticising the government's response to COVID-19 and Disha Ravi, 22, in the Greta The one of the most fundamental legal concerns with the sedition statute is its lack of clarity. The terms "incite to hatred or contempt" and "attempt to arouse disaffection" can be interpreted in a multitude of ways, allowing the police and government to harass those on the other side of the fence who are innocent. The police can use sedition law to falsely accuse people since it does not specify which acts are seditious and provides a broad definition of what can be regarded as seditious. The police's hasty filing of sedition prosecutions confines an individual in a process with far-reaching societal and psychological ramifications. Greta  Thunberg toolkit case for tweeting in support of India's farmer revolt have raised many worries about freedom of speech and expression in the country. It has a negative impact on democracy when journalists are exposed to censorship under the sedition statute. Sedition laws reduce government accountability because they allow the government to ignore its critics and punish people for sedition.The executive arm of the government has been given the right to utilise the ambiguously worded clause as a tool to regulate public opinion and indiscriminately wield power as a result of the sedition legislation. What's more worrying is that after you've been arrested for sedition, it's incredibly difficult to gain bail because the trial process can take a long time.

As a result, innocent people are harassed, while others are afraid to speak out against the administration. The Kashmiri students in Hubli are an example of how difficult it is to obtain bail in a sedition case, as they were granted default bail after 100 days in police prison. To summarise, sedition laws and their escalating abuse by governments of all shades (even those run by opposition parties) are a serious concern. Sedition laws and their flagrant misuse challenge the fundamental core of these liberties established in the Indian Constitution.

 The need of the hour requires the judiciary to review this draconian law. Even if abolishing this law may not be feasible, toning it down and issuing strict guidelines to limit its indiscriminate use can definitely help India's democratic standing apart from safeguarding freedom of expression in the country

ENDNOTE

  • The wounded vanity of governments- a case study of free speech and sedition in India constitutionalism3.0(2022), https://constitutionalism922426505.wordpress.com/2020/08/01/the-wounded-vanity-of-governments-a-case-study-of-free-speech-and-sedition-in-india/ (last visited May 8, 2022
  • India’s Spiralling Sedition Crisis & Why A Dilution of The Law Will Not Prevent Its Misuse — Article 14, Article-14.com (2022), https://article-14.com/post/india-s-spiralling-sedition-crisis-why-a-dilution-of-the-law-will-not-prevent-its-misuse-61a83b9694436 (last visited May 8, 2022).
  • Freedom of speech and sedition law in India, Lexlife India (2022), https://lexlife.in/2021/08/31/freedom-of-speech-and-sedition-law-in-india/ (last visited May 8, 2022)

About the Author: 

This post is prepared by Bhandra Anil, Law Student from The National University of Advanced Legal Studies, Kochi. He can be reached at bhadraanil1765@nuals.ac.in

 

MyLawman is now on Telegram (t.me/mylawman) Follow us for regular legal updates. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedInFacebook & Twitter or join our Whatsapp group .You can also subscribe for our Newsletter for Email Updates.