Top court hits pause button on colonial-era sedition law
NEW DELHI: Asserting that the sedition law in India “is not in tune with the current social milieu”, the Supreme Court in a historic decision on Wednesday effectively put on hold the 152year-old colonial-era penal provision, and asked the Centre and states to desist from arresting people or prosecuting them under the contentious provision until the Union government reviews it.
A bench, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) NV Ramana, emphasised that “it will be appropriate not to continue the usage of the provision of law by the governments” when the Centre itself has conveyed a desire to “reconsider and re-examine” the contours and validity of Section 124A in the Indian Penal Code — a nonbailable offence punishable with jail term ranging from three years to life, and one that activists and jurists have alleged is often misused to muzzle dissent.
The Union government said on Monday it has decided to re-examine and reconsider the provisions of the sedition law. On Wednesday, the government suggested tightening the requirements for filing a case under the law, but the court went a step further.
“It is clear that the Union of India agrees with the prima facie opinion expressed by this court that the rigors of Section 124A of IPC is not in tune with the current social milieu, and was intended for a time when this country was under the colonial regime. In light of the same, the
Union of India may reconsider the aforesaid provision of law,” said the bench, which also comprised justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli, in its 10-page order.
Putting in place a protective apparatus till the time the central government takes a call on the fate of the sedition law, the Supreme Court held that no new first information report (FIR) should be lodged by the police across the country under Section 124A while all court proceedings under the law should also be suspended.
“We hope and expect that the state and central governments will restrain from registering any FIR, continuing any investigation, or taking any coercive measures by invoking Section 124A of IPC while the aforesaid provision of law is under consideration... All pending trials, appeals and proceedings with respect to the charge framed under Section 124A of IPC be kept in abeyance,” directed the bench, fixing the matter for hearing next in the third week of July.
It clarified that if any fresh case is registered under Section 124A despite the court’s imprimatur, affected parties should approach the concerned courts, which should pass suitable orders, “taking into account the present order passed (by the Supreme Court) as well as the clear stand taken by the Union of India.”
About cases where the sedition charge has been invoked against the accused along with a set of other penal provisions, the bench left it to the wisdom of trial courts and high courts to decide if such cases can proceed in relation to other charges.
The bench said it is cognisant of security interests and integrity of the State on one hand, and the civil liberties of citizens on the other. “There is a requirement to balance both sets of considerations, which is a difficult exercise,” noted the court, turning down the Centre’s plea not to put the law in abeyance.
JAIPUR/NEW DELHI: A TV journalist on Wednesday became the first person to get relief in a sedition case, hours after the Supreme Court stayed the registration of FIRs, ongoing probes and coercive measures across the country until an “appropriate forum” of the government re-examined the colonial-era penal law.
The court’s verdict on the contentious law has also prompted the counsel for JNU student Sharjeel Imam, who is in judicial custody since 2020 in another sedition case, to move Delhi high court for his client’s release.
Taking note of the top court’s order, the Rajasthan high court directed the state police not to probe allegations against Network18 journalist Aman Chopra under Section 124A (sedition) of Indian Penal Code in a case over a television show he hosted last month. A bench of justice Dinesh Mehta, however, directed the anchor to appear for questioning before Dungarpur police on Monday from 11 am to 5 pm.
The court, which on Tuesday first stayed Chopra’s arrest in connection with an FIR in Dungarpur district, further extended the stay till May 20.
The HC’s direction to the state police came after Chopra’s counsel, Siddharth Luthra, informed it about the SC verdict.
Three FIRs were registered in Dungarpur, Bundi and Alwar, respectively, against the journalist over a show he hosted on April 22 on the demolition of two temples in Alwar during an anti-encroachment drive and which allegedly resulted in communal disharmony.
The journalist was booked under sections 124-A (sedition), besides other sections of IPC.
On Saturday, the HC had granted Chopra interim protection from arrest in the FIRs registered in Bundi and Alwar.
Meanwhile, Imam’s counsel, Tanveer Ahmed Mir, said he will move Delhi HC seeking his client’s release. Imam was booked under the sedition law over his alleged provocative speeches during the protests against the now Citizenship Amendment Bill and National Register of Citizens. He has been in judicial custody since January 28, 2020.
“We will file a fresh plea before Justice Siddharth Mridul, who is already hearing the bail application and the challenge to the framing of charges,” Mir told HT.