{"id":187510,"date":"2022-06-01T21:07:45","date_gmt":"2022-06-01T15:37:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blog.forumias.com\/?p=187510"},"modified":"2022-06-01T21:07:45","modified_gmt":"2022-06-01T15:37:45","slug":"the-sedition-law-must-go","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/the-sedition-law-must-go\/","title":{"rendered":"The sedition law must go"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Context<\/strong>: Recently, the Supreme Court directed the Union government and the states to refrain from using the law of sedition. In addition, the Supreme Court has also kept all previous cases under Section 124A of the IPC in abeyance till the matter is reconsidered in a comprehensive way. <\/span><\/p>\n

Hence, it will be inappropriate to continue its use while the Supreme Court is re-examining its constitutionality.<\/p>\n

What are the various court decisions regarding Section 124A?<\/h5>\n

Bal Gangadhar Tilak\u2019s case (1897)<\/strong>: The Privy Council declined to grant permission to appeal against an order of conviction and sentence by the High Court of Bombay.<\/p>\n

–<\/strong> The council affirmed that \u201cdisaffection\u201d only meant \u201cabsence of affection in any degree towards the British rule or its administration or representatives\u201d, and that exciting of mutiny or rebellion or actual disturbance of any sort was \u201cabsolutely immaterial\u201d!<\/p>\n

Niharendu Dutt Majumdar And Ors. vs Emperor<\/strong>: The Federal Court held that if the language of Section 124A were to be read literally \u201cit would make a surprising number of persons in India guilty of sedition and that no one however supposes that it is to be read in this literal sense\u201d.<\/p>\n

–<\/strong> It then declared that \u201cthe gist of the offence was public disorder or the likelihood of public disorder\u201d (AIR 1942 FC 22), the decision in Tilak\u2019s case remained unnoticed.<\/p>\n

In 1947, the interpretation of Section 124A was reiterated by a Bench of five judges of the Privy Council<\/strong> in which it was declared that the Federal Court had proceeded on an \u201centirely wrong construction of Section 124A, and if the Federal Court had given their attention to Tilak\u2019s case (1897) they should have recognised it as an authority\u2026 by which they were bound\u201d.<\/p>\n

With the advent of the Constitution of India on January 26, 1950, this interpretation of Section 124A became \u201cthe law in force immediately before the commencement of the Constitution\u201d<\/strong>. It continued unaltered only because of the operation of Article 372 of the Constitution.<\/p>\n

–<\/strong> Article 372 stated that all laws in force in the territory of India immediately before the commencement of the Constitution shall continue in force therein until altered or repealed or amended by a competent legislature or other competent authority.<\/p>\n

In 1955, the Supreme Court<\/strong> held that the words \u201claws in force made by a legislature or other competent authority in the territory of India\u201d in Article 13(3) of the Constitution could only mean a legislative authority<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

In 1962, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court<\/strong> held that though Section 124A \u201cclearly violated\u201d the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression in Article 19(1)(a), it was not unconstitutional only because it was protected from challenge by the words \u201cin the interests of public order\u201d in Article 19(2).<\/p>\n

Source<\/strong>: This post is based on the article \u201cThe sedition law must go<\/strong>\u201d published in The Indian Express<\/strong> on 1st June 22<\/strong>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Context: Recently, the Supreme Court directed the Union government and the states to refrain from using the law of sedition. In addition, the Supreme Court has also kept all previous cases under Section 124A of the IPC in abeyance till the matter is reconsidered in a comprehensive way. Hence, it will be inappropriate to continue… Continue reading The sedition law must go<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10328,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1230,9],"tags":[212,10500],"class_list":["post-187510","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-9-pm-daily-articles","category-public","tag-gs-paper-2","tag-indian-express","entry"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","views":{"total":0,"cached_at":"","cached_date":1701579613},"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/187510","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/10328"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=187510"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/187510\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=187510"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=187510"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=187510"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}