The Supreme Court has listed on April 27 two petitions challenging the constitutionality of the sedition law.
The petitions, one by retired Army general S.G. Vombatkere and the other by Editors Guild of India, have been listed for hearing before a three-judge Bench led by Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana. The other two judges on the Bench are Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli.
Last year, the CJI had voiced what could be an unprecedented judicial criticism of the way sedition was used by the government to crush liberties. The Chief Justice had questioned why a colonial law used against Mahatma Gandhi and Bal Gangadhar Tilak continued to survive in the law book after 75 years of Independence.
“Sedition is a colonial law. It suppresses freedoms. It was used against Mahatma Gandhi, Tilak... Is this law necessary after 75 years of Independence?” Chief Justice Ramana, heading a three-judge Bench, had orally addressed Attorney General K.K. Venugopal and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre.
‘Prone to misuse’
Chief Justice Ramana had said sedition or Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code was prone to misuse by the government. “The use of sedition is like giving a saw to the carpenter to cut a piece of wood and he uses it to cut the entire forest itself,” Chief Justice Ramana had lashed out.
The CJI’s oral statement in open court marks a significant note amidst rising public denouncement of central and State law enforcement agencies using the sedition law to silence dissent, muffle free expression and for denying bail to incarcerated activists, journalists, students and civil society members. A number of petitions have been filed highlighting the "chilling effect" sedition has on the fundamental right of free speech. The CJI’s remarks also opened the floor for debate and introspection on the court’s own judgment in 1962, in the Kedar Nath case, which upheld Section 124A.
The CJI had drawn the attention of the Attorney General to the conviction rates under sedition.
“If you look at the history of use of this Section 124A of IPC, you will find that the conviction rate is very low. There is misuse of power by executive agencies,” the Chief Justice had said.
The Bench had issued notice to the Centre on the petition filed by Gen. (retd.) Vombatkere, represented by advocates P.B. Suresh and Prasanna S., to quash Section 124A. The court had also issued notice to the government on a writ petition filed jointly by the Editors Guild of India and cartoonist Aseem Trivedi.
The Bench had noted that two other petitions filed by Kishore Chandra Wangkemcha and M/s Aamoda Broadcasting Company Private Limited, the latter against the Andhra Pradesh government, were pending before the apex court. Both cases concern sedition charges.
Senior journalist Arun Shourie and NGO Common Cause, both represented by advocate Prashant Bhushan, had also moved the Supreme Cour to quash Section 124A. Their petition contended that a "presumption of constitutionality does not apply to pre-constitutional laws as those laws have been made by foreign legislature or body".
Published - April 26, 2022 11:49 pm IST
