Sedition is a term that has been in use since the 17th century in England, when lawmakers believed that only favorable opinions of the government should be allowed to exist. This law was proposed by Thomas Macaulay, a British historian-politician, in 1837 but was surprisingly not included when the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was enacted in 1860. However, Section 124A, which covers sedition, was added to the IPC in 1870 through an amendment introduced by Sir James Stephen.
Explanation and Current Use of Sedition Law in India
According to Section 124A of the IPC, sedition refers to any attempt, whether through words, signs, representations, or otherwise, to incite hatred or contempt against the government established by law in India. These actions may include disloyalty or any form of hostility. That said, comments without intent to induce hatred, contempt, or disaffection don’t constitute an offence under this section. A person found guilty of sedition can face penalties ranging from three years’ imprisonment to life imprisonment, as well as a potential fine. Moreover, the individual will be disqualified from any government job and their passport would be suspended.
Purpose and Importance of Sedition Law in India
Although the Indian Constitution promises freedom of speech and expression to all citizens, the right is not unbridled. The government has the authority to impose certain restrictions to prevent misuse of this freedom. For instance, Article 19(2) allows reasonable restrictions to maintain unity and integrity, as well as the stability of the state. The sedition law specifically counters anti-national, secessionist, and terrorist activities.
Critiques and Concerns Regarding Sedition Law
Despite its utility, the sedition law has faced numerous criticisms. Its roots date back to the colonial era when it was used by British rulers to imprison those who criticized their policies. Several leaders of the Indian freedom struggle were convicted under this law, and many believe that it suppresses the constitutionally guaranteed right to protest. Consequently, there are concerns that the sedition law is gradually eroding India’s democratic values.
Supreme Court Rulings on Sedition
The Supreme Court of India has periodically provided rulings regarding sedition. Its judgment in 1950 in Romesh Thapar v. State of Madras asserted that criticizing the government is not a valid reason to limit freedom of speech unless it threatens to overthrow the state. Subsequently, high courts in Punjab and Haryana, and Uttar Pradesh declared Section 124A unconstitutional, calling it a tool for the colonial masters to suppress discontent. However, in Kedarnath Singh v. State of Bihar in 1962, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of IPC Section 124A while aiming to minimize its misuse.
Recent Developments and Future Considerations
In the recent years, there have been several notable developments concerning the law of sedition. The Supreme Court protected a political leader and six senior journalists from arrests relating to alleged tweets and sharing unverified news in February 2021. In July 2021, a petition was filed seeking a review of the sedition law. The court ruled that any law criminalizing speech based on unclear and unconstitutional definitions isn’t a reasonable restriction on freedom of expression as per Article 19(1)(a). It was expressed that such laws may lead to self-censorship or restraining from expressing opinions for fear of governmental punishment.
The future of sedition law in India depends on decisions made by both the courts and the government. Revising the law, whether through amendments or a repeal, could possibly bring back the provision in a different form. The higher judiciary might need to exploit its supervisory powers to educate the police and magistracy about constitutional provisions safeguarding free speech. Accommodating only matters concerning the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the country might also be an effective way to narrow down the definition of sedition.
