The Center has requested the Supreme Court to reject petitions against sedition law stating the three-judge bench cannot examine its validity.
While there is concern that the sedition law is being used indiscriminately by the Center to clamp free speech and stop any criticism against the government, the Center has defended the sedition law and requested the Supreme Court to reject the pleas challenging it.
Presently, a three-judge bench led by Chief Justice NV Ramana and also comprising justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli is hearing a batch of pleas challenging the constitutional validity of the law on sedition.
In an affidavit filed before the court, the Center said, a three-judge bench cannot examine its validity and the matter should be referred to a larger bench.
The government said, the judgement of a constitution bench in the Kedar Nath vs State of Bihar case is binding and does not require reconsideration.
A five-judge bench in the Kedar Nath Singh case in 1962 had upheld the validity of the sedition law while attempting to restrict its scope for misuse. The government also said that instances of abuse of sedition will never be a justification for reconsideration of the previous judgement of the five-judge bench.
The Supreme Court will hear the matter on Tuesday.
The Sedition Law
Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code lays down the punishment for sedition. The Indian Penal Code was enacted in 1860, under the British Raj. Throughout the British Raj, this section was used to suppress activists fighting for independence, including Lokmanya Tilak and Mahatma Gandhi, both of whom were found guilty and imprisoned.
The law was made to suppress the right to free speech. Sedition was made a cognizable offense for the first time in history in India during the tenure of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in 1973, that is, arrest without a warrant was now permissible.
In 1962 the Supreme Court of India interpreted the section to apply only if there is, say, “incitement to violence” or “overthrowing a democratically elected government through violent means.
It is apparent this law needs to be amended because it is curbing the right to free speech and also allowing large-scale arrests of people merely expressing themselves with no incitement to violence or overthrow of the government, obviously. The right to criticize one’s government also comes under freedom of speech and was done widely by the BJP when Congress was in power. Perhaps the BJP should reconsider because the sedition law can once again be used against them when BJP falls from power!