Q. In this landmark case, although the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the sedition law, it attempted to restrict its scope for misuse. The court held that unless accompanied by an incitement or call for violence, criticism of the government cannot be labelled sedition. SC also gave seven principles in this ruling specifying situations in which the charge of sedition cannot be applied.
Above paragraph describes which of the following landmark cases?
Exp) Option b is the correct answer
Option a is incorrect: In 1995, the Supreme Court, in Balwant Singh v State of Punjab, held that mere sloganeering which evoked no public response did not amount to sedition.
Option b is correct: In the landmark 1962 Kedar Nath Singh case, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the sedition law, it attempted to restrict its scope for misuse. The court held that unless accompanied by an incitement or call for violence, criticism of the government cannot be labelled sedition. Further, seven principles in the Kedar Nath Singh ruling specify situations in which the charge of sedition cannot be applied.
Option c is incorrect: Verdict in Kesavananda Bharati case was delivered on 24th April 1973 by a thin majority of 7:6 wherein the majority held that any provision of the Indian Constitution can be amended by the Parliament, provided that such amendment did not change the Constitution’s basic structure. Thus, concept of ‘basic structure’ came because of this verdict.
Option d is incorrect: In I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu, a nine-member bench of Supreme Court held that ninth schedule items are not immune to judicial review as it is part of the constitution.
| Important Tips Sedition, which falls under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code, is defined as any action that brings or attempts to bring hatred or contempt towards the government of India. This was inserted into the Section 124A of IPC in 1870, by the British. |
