New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a major initiative on Wednesday, and ordered that Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code which criminalises the offence of sedition be kept in abeyance till the government’s exercise of reviewing the law is complete. A bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli also asked the Central government and States not to register any cases under Section 124A. Section 124-A (sedition) under the IPC is a non-bailable provision.
The bench added that if such cases are registered in future, the parties are at liberty to approach the court and the court has to expeditiously dispose of the same. The apex court also said that those already booked under Section 124A IPC and are in jail can approach the concerned courts for bail. ‘It would be appropriate to put the provision on abeyance’, the bench ordered. Allowing the Central government to re-examine and reconsider the provisions of Section 124A, the apex court said that it will be appropriate not to use the provision of law till further re-examination is over.
The bench now posted the hearing of a batch of pleas challenging the constitutional validity of the sedition law, in July. In its order, the bench stated, ‘The court is cognizant of the duty of the State on one hand and citizens’ civil liberties on the other. There is a requirement of the balance of consideration. The case of the petitioner is that this provision of law dated back to 1870 and is being misused. The Attorney General had also given instances of glaring misuse like cases registered for a recital of Hanuman Chalisa’. ‘It is clear that the Central government agrees that rigours of Section 124A is not in tune with the current situation and it was intended for the time when the country was under colonial law. Thus Centre may reconsider it… it will be appropriate not to use this provision of law till further re-examination is over. We hope Centre and States will desist from registering any FIR under 124A or initiate a proceeding under the same till re-examination is over’, it added.
Also read: ‘Modi@20: Dreams Meet Delivery’: Book launched on PM Modi’s model of governance!
At the outset of the hearing Solicitor General, Tushar Mehta appearing for the Centre told the top court government cannot prevent police from registering a cognisable offence under sedition provision, but an FIR under Section 124A would be registered only if the area Superintendent of Police (SP) is satisfied that facts of a case involve sedition offence. ‘Once there is cognisable offence and it is held valid by Constitution bench then staying the effect may not be the correct course of action. that is why responsible officers must take responsibility. His satisfaction would be subject to judicial review before a magistrate’, Mehta submitted. Solicitor General said pending sedition cases can be reviewed during the re-examination process of the provision by the Centre for early grant of bail to those booked under Section 124A IPC.
Yesterday, the top court had asked the Centre to inform it, if the registration of future cases for sedition can be kept in abeyance till it completes the reconsideration process with respect to sedition law. It had also asked the Central government what it proposes to do about pending and future sedition cases as the Centre decided to re-examine the validity of Section 124A. On Monday while filing a fresh affidavit, the Centre told the apex court that it has decided to re-examine and reconsider the provisions of Section 124A and requested it not to take up the case till the matter is examined by the government.
Also read: Question paper leak case; Accused TDP leader P Narayana gets bail in 24 hours
Last year, CJI Ramana had questioned the Central government on the requirement of sedition law even after 75 years of independence and observed that it was colonial law that was used against freedom fighters. Various petitions were filed in the apex court challenging the constitutional validity of sedition law. The pleas were filed by former army officer Major-General SG Vombatkere (Retd), former Union minister Arun Shourie, NGO PUCL, Editors Guild of India, and journalists Patricia Mukhim and Anuradha Bhasin among others. While pointing out that sedition law was used against freedom fighters like Mahatma Gandhi and Bal Gangadhar Tilak, the apex court had asked Attorney General KK Venugopal, appearing for the Centre, why it can’t be repealed.
The court had observed that the Centre has repealed many stale laws and enquired why the government is not looking into repealing Section 124A (which deals with the offence of sedition) of the IPC. It had further said that the court was concerned about the misuse of such laws. Earlier, a different bench of the top court had sought a response from the Centre on a plea challenging the Constitutional validity of sedition law, filed by two journalists — Kishorechandra Wangkhemcha and Kanhaiya Lal Shukla, working in Manipur and Chhattisgarh respectively.
Post Your Comments