Blog Image

Sedition Law and Its Constitutional Validity

SEDITION LAW AND ITS CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY
- Paramjeet Ojha, National Law University, Odisha

History of Sedition
In the words of Stephen, “Sedition may be defined as Conduct which has either as its object or as its natural consequence the unlawful display of dissatisfaction with the Government or with the existing order of society.

It is an age-old law, introduced by Britishers during Colonial Period to suppress the voice of nationalist movement. The term Sedition finds its place in Sec- 124A of Indian Penal Code herein after (IPC). However, this section does not define the term sedition rather it covers the offences that come under it.

Its origin could be traced back to as early as 1837, under clause 113 of the draft IPC by Thomas Macaulay. It was so done, seeing the rise in rebellion against the British rule. However, this law failed to became part of the original IPC, enacted in 1860. But, the Britishers observing the unrest owing to countrywide insurgent against Colonial rule inserted the term “Sedition” under Section 124A of IPC through an amendment in 1870. And, this section defines Sedition as “Whoever, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs,  or by visible representation or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring  into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards, the Government established by law in India, shall be punished with [imprisonment for life], to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added or with fine. While it covers certain exceptions i.e– the impression “disaffection” includes disloyalty and all feelings  of comments expressing disapprobation of the Measures of the Government with a view to obtain their alternation by lawful means, without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection, do not constitute an Offence under this section, and comments expressing disapprobation of the Administrative or other action of government without exciting or attempting to excite hatred , contempt or disaffection do not contribute an offence  under this section.

Notorious trial cases under sedition law-
After the enactment of this Provision there have been many instances of prosecution under this Act. Mostly the Editors of the Newspapers were charged for Sedition because they were the ones through which the Nationalist feelings were Circulated.

The first notable trial under Sedition was of Jogendra Chandra Bose in 1891. He was an editor of a newspaper and was charged under this act for writing an article criticizing the Age of Consent Bill. In the early 20th century indeed, Freedom Fighters like Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Mahatma Gandhi were also charged for Sedition. Gandhi in his weekly journal “Young India” wrote three politically sensitive articles and those articles, in the opinion of Britishers excite Disloyalty among Indians against Government. So, he was prosecuted and sentenced to six -year jail term.

Bal Gangadhar Tilak was charged for sedition twice. Second time he was tried for Disaffection as he called for immediate Swaraj or Self Rule in his Newspaper. So, from the above example it can be implied that, Britishers used this law as a tool to crush the Nationalist feelings among Indians. Mahatma Gandhi stated in the context of this law that “Section - 124A of IPC under which I am happily charged is perhaps the Prince among the Political Sections of the IPC designed to suppress the Liberty of the Citizen.’’[1]

Post constitutional era -
In the constituent assembly there were serious opposition for inclusion of “Sedition” as a restriction on Freedom of Speech and Expression under article-13 of the then draft of the Indian Constitution. Even, Pandit JawaharLal Nehru opined that the law under IPC- 124A was Unconstitutional and quoted that “Now so far as I am concerned [Section 124-A] is highly Objectionable and Obnoxious and it should have no place both for Practical and Historical reasons  if you like, in anybody of laws that we might pass and consequently, ‘Sedition’ was omitted from being restriction on Freedom of Speech and Expression.

Later, in 1962 the Supreme Court upheld the Constitutional validity of Sedition law in the case of Kedar Nath Singh v State of Bihar.[2] And, maintained a balance weight between Freedom of Speech and Expression and Sedition law that by default put some restriction on the aforesaid Freedom. Its Constitutional validity was not only limited to this case but till date it is being challenged. Indeed, the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the High Courts have opined that the Government should either repeal this timeworn law or make the requisite amendment to keep in concord with the current scenario. Apart from this, the Law Commission of India in 2018 has published a Consultation Paper directing the Central Government that the time is ripe for rethinking or repealing the section 124A of the IPC that deals with Sedition. 

India is the largest democratic country and Dissent is the Safety Valve of the Democracy. So, such Colonial Era law that has become obsolete does not hold good in 21st Century. Indeed, now also this law is often used by the Government as machinery to suppress the voice of the people. And since Sedition is a Cognizable Offence i.e. (Police do not require Warrant to arrest), they often arrest the people and frame charges on frivolous grounds. “As per the latest report of the NCRB, the number of sedition cases filed in the past 4 years since 2015 stood at 193. However, the trials have been completed only in 43 cases and out of these the accused have been convicted only in 4 cases.”[3] This points out to the fact that how the government and the Police misuse this law as per their whims and fancies and fail miserably when it comes to convict those accused of committing the offence. So, it can be implied that this law does more harm than it does anything good. Now most of the Country have held the Sedition law as Unconstitutional or rather they have omitted this from their Penal Statue. Infact, England that begot this provision in India has also omitted it ten years back, then there is no proper reason for India to continue with the same. Now one way we can say that Sedition has become redundant because it is covered in laws like The Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (section 95), The Seditious Meetings Act, 1911 and The Unlawful (Prevention) Act {Section 2(o) (iii)}. 

Conclusion

At last, it can be concluded that this law transgresses upon the Freedom enshrined under Article 19(1) of the Indian Constitution. And, the Sedition can be termed as Anti-national law also because the Government under the shadow of this provision brand anyone who criticizes the Government or its policy as anti-national. So, the Legislative reforms are the need of the hour for this law. And, the Supreme Court Guardian of the fundamental right should also hold this law Unconstitutional, to be in consonance with Modern India. It was rightly stated by the Thomas Jefferson, 3rd US President that,

“When the people fear the Government, there is tyranny, when the Government fears the people, there is liberty.”

REFERENCES

1. Siddharth Narrain, ‘Disaffection and the Law: The Chilling Effect of Sedition Laws in India’ (2011) 46 EPW 33,37.
2. KedarNath Singh v State of Bihar AIR 1962 SC 955.
3. India Today, ‘Use and misuse of sedition law: Section 124A of IPC (New Delhi, 9 October, 2019)15:04.