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.

NEW DELHI: The Union government on Wednesday said it respected the Supreme Court’s decision putting sedition on hold and will work to ensure the law is not misused but added that all organs of the governments needed to respect one another and not cross the “lakshman rekha” (boundary).

The government also hit out at the Opposition, hours after the apex court effectively put on hold the 152-year-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.

Union minister for law and justice Kiren Rijiju said he respected the top court’s decision but added that there was a “lakshman rekha” (boundary) that no one should cross. “We’ve made our positions very clear and also informed the court about the intention of our PM (Prime Minister Narendra Modi). We respect the court and its independence. But there’s a lakshman rekha that must be respected by all organs of the state in letter and spirit,” Rijiju told reporters.

“We have to ensure that we respect the provisions of the Indian Constitution as well as existing laws,” he added.

Just as the government should respect the court, the latter too should respect the government, the Union minister said.

“We have clear demarcation of boundary and that lakshman rekha should not be crossed by anybody,” he added.

Earlier this week, the government told the Supreme Court that it will review the contentious provision and said Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s impetus to protect civil liberties and shed colonial baggage spurred its decision. The court was hearing an array of petitions pressing for striking down Section 124A of Indian Penal Code on grounds of infringement of fundamental rights and rampant abuse.

Junior law minister SP Singh Baghel said it was the duty of the government to prevent misuse but added that sedition had happened in the country, and therefore there was a need for amending the law.

“It is the duty of the government to ensure that the law is not misused. There are some laws that require amendments. The proposal in this regard has been made and its affidavit has also been filed by the government in the Supreme Court,” he told ANI.

“Sedition has happened in the country. A great example of this is the assassination of two former prime ministers. There is a need for an amendment to the law and people’s opinions will also be taken on this. The government believes that the sedition law should not be misused politically. But the definition of sedition will have to be changed and clearly defined,” he added.

Rijiju, in a series of tweets, also hit back at Congress leader Rahul Gandhi for his remarks on the court’s decision which criticised the Centre.

“If there is one party that is the antithesis of freedom, democracy and respect for institutions, it is the Indian National Congress. This party has always stood with Breaking India forces and left no opportunity to divide India,” he tweeted.

The Union minister also said former prime minister Indira Gandhi was guilty of trampling free speech and making Section 124A a cognisable offence for the first time .

“When it comes to trampling over free speech, Mrs Indira Gandhi Ji is a Gold Medal Winner! We all know about the Emergency but do you also know she imposed Article 356 over 50 times! She came up with the idea of a “committed judiciary” to weaken the judiciary, our 3rd pillar!” Rijiju tweeted.

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) said the Supreme Court order must be viewed in the context of the overall positive suggestion of the government that it wishes to examine the matter that was “duly accepted” by the apex court.

“The Supreme Court order must be viewed with the overall positive suggestions of the government that it wishes to examine the matter. It has been duly accepted by the court,” party spokesperson Nalin Kohli said.

No political party, other than BJP, had the courage to do this (review) in the last 75 years, party spokesperson Gaurav Bhatia told ANI.

“The historic mistake done by the Congress government is being rectified by the BJP. Congress has misused sedition law in all its ruling states,” he added.