What is sedition?
Whoever, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards, the Government established by law in India, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three.
Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code lays down the punishment for sedition. The Indian Penal Code was enacted in 1860, under the British Raj. Section 124A forms part of Chapter VI of the Code which deals with offences against the state and section 124A was introduced in 1870.
The sedition trial of 1897 against Lokmanya Tilak is historically famous. Tilak, a lawyer by training, was also politically active in support of independence. He established and published two dailies—Kesari in Marathi and Mahratta in English; both being published from Pune. In 1894, Professor R. P. Karkaria presented his paper on the Maratha king Shivaji to the Royal Asiatic Society in Bombay. This turned into an annual celebration commemorating the anniversary of Shivaji’s coronation. Three years later, Tilak published reports of this celebration, as “Shivaji’s Utterances”; this essay doubled as an attack on the colonial government. Justice Arthur Strachey, who presided over Tilak’s case, widened the understanding of Section 124A. Under Strachey’s definition, the attempt to excite “feelings of enmity” against government was also a form of sedition. Tilak was found guilty by the jury and sentenced to 18 months of rigorous imprisonment.Tilak again faced charges against sedition for two Kesari articles, titled “The Country’s Misfortune” (12 May 1908) and “These Remedies Are Not Lasting” (9 June 1908). He was again found guilty under the newly drafted section 124A, and sentenced to six years of imprisonment in Burma.
In 1922, Mahatma Gandhi three articles for Young India resulted into his and Shankarlal Banker’s imprisonment under the sedition section. While appearing in court, Gandhi referred to Section 124A as the “prince among the political sections of the Indian Penal Code designed to suppress the liberty of the citizen”.
During the 21st century, various notable authors, creative professionals, activists and politicians have been charged with sedition under Section 124A.Arundhati Roy (2010), and Aseem Trivedi (2012), Rinshad Reera (2019).
Punishment for the offence of sedition
- Sedition is a non-bailable offence. Punishment under the Section 124A ranges from imprisonment up to three years to a life term, to which fine may be added.
- A person charged under this law is barred from a government job. They have to live without their passport and must produce themselves in the court at all times as and when required.
Dissent and criticism of the government are essential ingredients of robust public debate in a vibrant democracy. They should not be constructed as sedition. Right to question, criticize and change rulers is very fundamental to the idea of democracy.Sedition is an archaic, oppressive colonial law that exalts the government to a position of sanctity and seeks to make us obedient, unquestioning vassals of the state. It has no place in a democracy and must be abolished
IPC and Unlawful Activities Prevention Act have provisions that penalize “disrupting the public order” or “overthrowing the government with violence and illegal means”. These are sufficient for protecting the national integrity. There is no need for Section 124A.The sedition law is being misused as a tool to persecute political dissent. A wide and concentrated executive discretion is inbuilt into it which permits the blatant abuse.
In the recent consultation paper on the sedition, the Law Commission has suggested invoking 124A to only criminalize acts committed with the intention to disrupt public order or to overthrow the Government with violence and illegal means.
Recent scenario
It is a matter of concern that a large number of sedition cases have been filed against people for protesting against the CAA. Data from the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) show that 194 cases of sedition have been filed since the CAA was passed on December 11, 2019. More cases of sedition have been filed since December 11 than in the last three years put together, according to NCRB data. The data also show that while the number of sedition cases filed has been going up every year (numbers for sedition cases started being recorded from 2014) in the last four years, only four cases actually resulted in conviction.
Sedition law is essentially that of suppressing free speech and free thought, both of which are unpopular with the government. Sedition is an offence which existed in our Indian Penal Code (IPC) before we got Independence because the colonial master wished to penalise anybody who was trying to overthrow the state. But the irony is that in independent India, of late, this provision is being used to bully and terrorise citizens. And in the Bidar case, where a parent and the principal of a school were charged with sedition for staging a play critical of the CAA, we saw that it was used — or rather misused — to bully and terrorise small children and a young woman.
The Supreme Court, in its interpretation of Section 124A, clearly says that it has to be against the state, not against the government. One can criticise the BJP, One can criticise the Congress, One can criticise the Communist parties. That is not sedition. When someone start criticising the constitutional state of India, that is when one invite the charge of sedition and even there the Supreme Court clearly says that there has to be a direct incitement to violence. So, sedition is a very specific and a very serious offence, and when it is used to silence and terrorise the ordinary citizen who is raising a grievance, it is terrorism by the state.
Conclusion:
India is the largest democracy of the world and the right to free speech and expression is an essential ingredient of democracy. The expression or thought that is not in consonance with the policy of the government of the day should not be considered as sedition. The Law Commission has rightly said, “an expression of frustration over the state of affairs cannot be treated as sedition”. If the country is not open to positive criticism, there would be no difference between the pre- and post-Independence eras.
