Highlights
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court said it would hear arguments on May 10 on the legal question of whether the pleas challenging the colonialera penal law on sedition be referred to a larger bench and granted time to the Centre to file its response.
A special bench comprising Chief Justice NV Ramana and Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli was told by Attorney General KK Venugopal, that the misuse of the provision like it happened against a Maharashtra MP for reciting ‘Hanuman Chalisa’ has to be stopped by laying down guidelines.
However, there was no need to refer the five-judge bench verdict of the top court in the Kedar Nath case in 1962 to a bench of five or seven judges, the top law officer said.
The apex court had upheld the constitutional validity of the sedition law in the Kedar Nath Singh case.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing as the lead counsel on behalf of the petitioners, said the reference to a larger bench may not be necessary. He said a three-judge bench can still go into the issue ignoring the 1962 judgement of the five-judge bench in the light of subsequent developments in the fundamental rights jurisprudence.
The bench commenced the hearing and heard arguments on a batch of pleas against the sedition law for some time before adjourning it to Tuesday.
At the outset, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, sought a few more days for filing the reply saying the draft response made by lawyers awaits approval by competent authority as the issue is of extreme importance. » Kapil Sibal: Reference to a larger bench may not be necessary
» SC had asked if the colonial-era law was still needed after 75 years of Independence
Secondly, some fresh matters have been served recently and the contents of those pleas also needed a response.
The bench, on April 27, had directed the Central government to file a reply saying it would commence the final hearing in the matter on May 5 and would not entertain any request for adjournment. Concerned over the enormous misuse of the penal law on sedition, the top court in July last year had asked the Centre why it was not repealing the provision used by the British to silence people like Mahatma Gandhi to suppress the freedom movement.
The non-bailable provision makes any speech or expression that brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the government established by law in India a criminal offence punishable with a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
While issuing notice on the petitions in July’21, SC had referred to the alleged misuse of the provision and asked if the law was still needed after 75 years of Independence.
“This law dispute is concerning, it is a colonial law. It was meant to suppress the freedom movement. It was used by the British to silence Gandhi, Tilak etc.”, the CJI had asked.
Some of the other petitioners include former union minister Arun Shourie and journalists Kishorechandra Wangkhemcha from Manipur and Kanhaiya Lal Shukla from Chhattisgarh.