Sedition Law in India: Evolution & Impact (PDF)

**Title:** A Critical Analysis of Sedition Law in India: Evolution, Current Relevance, and Freedom of Speech Impact Name:- Ramani Dhruv Course:- BB.A.LL.B Date:- **Abstract** This paper critically examines the Sedition Law of India from the standpoint of history, constitution, and contemporary...

**Title:** A Critical Analysis of Sedition Law in India: Evolution, Current Relevance, and Freedom of Speech Impact Name:- Ramani Dhruv Course:- BB.A.LL.B Date:- **Abstract** This paper critically examines the Sedition Law of India from the standpoint of history, constitution, and contemporary relevance. The right was incorporated under the Indian Penal Code\'s Section 124A, given during the British colonial period to curb dissent against the colonial administration. Although it was originally a colonial instrument, sedition law persists in free India, and is routinely used against political dissenters, journalists, and activists. This paper scans the implications of sedition law for free speech and democratic values through an examination of judicial interpretations and recent case studies. It concludes with an assessment of whether Section 124A should be retained, amended, or altogether repealed to conform with the constitutional guarantees of free expression. ------- ------------------------------------------------------------ -- **1** **Introduction** **1.1 Background** **1.2 Research Questions** **1.3 Objectives of the Study** **2** **Historical Evolution and Development of Sedition Law** **3** **Constitutional Validity and Judicial Interpretation** **3.1 Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962)** **3.2 Balwant Singh v. State of Punjab (1995)** **3.3 Recent Judicial Trends** **4** **Contemporary Application and Misuse of Sedition Law** **4.1 JNU Sedition Case (2016)** **4.2 Journalists and Activists** **4.3 Farmers' Protest (2020-2021)** **5** **Impact of Sedition Law on Free Speech and Democracy** **5.1 Effect on Media and Press Freedom** **5.2 Chilling Effect on Civil Society** **6** **Comparative Analysis: Sedition Laws in Other Countries** **7** **Recommendations for Reform** **7.2 Judicial Oversight** **7.3 Repeal and Replacement** **8** **Conclusion** **References** ------- ------------------------------------------------------------ -- 1. Introduction 1. Background Sedition law in India has got the sanction of colonial history and is enshrined under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), enacted by the British in the year 1870 for quite relevant reasons. The provision was meant to suppress the dissenting voices and curbing voices challenging the authority of the British Empire. It defined sedition as any act, speech, or publication to bring hatred, contempt, or disaffection against the government. This legal instrument has been largely employed in suppressing India\'s independence movement leaders and, within the overall category of activists who opposed British rule. Although India gained her independence in 1947 and evolved into a democratic republic, the provisions made under Section 124A have remained largely unchanged over time and remain as a relic of colonial oppression in modern law.\ \ Indian law, itself, has been contentious because it resurfaced numerous allegations of its misuse. It has been because of this provision many a case would have been seen where political dissent is not allowed, criticism of the government\'s policy is restrained, and freedom of speech is curtailed. This then raises red flags about its consistency with the fundamentals of rights as laid down in the Indian Constitution, particularly Article 19(1)(a), which guarantees freedom of speech and expression. As a result, there is an increasing debate on whether the law of sedition should be repealed or reformed to align with democratic value. 2. Research Questions What is the historical background and evolution of sedition law in India? How has the judiciary interpreted Section 124A, and what is its impact on free speech? Is the sedition law being misused in contemporary India? Should the sedition law be repealed or amended to reflect modern democratic values? 3. Objectives of the Study - Tracking the historical development of sedition law and its influence across colonial and post-independence periods. - To understand the extent to which sedition law attacks freedom of speech and democratic governance. - To investigate recent case studies with a view to understand the present-day application of sedition law. - To make recommendations for legal reform. 4. Analysis The history of sedition is quite intricate, as it was first a political repressive tool when the colonial Britain was imploring it against even some of its brightest leaders. Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Mahatma Gandhi are the two of their era\'s greatest leaders against whom this act was taken. It survived even after India became independent and continued being used post-independence as well. However, its constitutional validity was upheld by the Supreme Court in Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar in 1962. The limited scope, however, was given to the same by defining sedition as an act that incites violence or public disorder.\ \ More recently, charges for sedition have been levelled against journalists, activists, and political dissenters, and public order may be mentioned as a fig leaf to camouflage the abuse of the law to harass. Examples include both the student leaders who led the JNU agitation in 2016 and the journalists reporting on the farmers\' protests that started in late 2020 and continued through early 2021. Such examples only go to point out that the law requires more precise guidelines on its application. 2. Historical Evolution and Development of Sedition Law Sedition law was enacted under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in 1870, almost a decade after the IPC itself was enacted in 1860. Section 124A was enacted by the British colonial administration to suppress the surge in nationalist feelings and demands for autonomy that were witnessing an upward swing in all corners of India. This law was very astutely employed against silencing freedom fighters and nationalist leaders, who made speeches, writings, and public meetings to raise independence. It defined sedition as any act, speech, or performance that basically instigated hatred, contempt, or disaffection against the government. This made it a very effective law to suppress dissenting voices. During the course of the struggle, this law was repeatedly employed against many prominent leaders. It had already been used against Bal Gangadhar Tilak and then Mahatma Gandhi. For instance, in 1897, Tilak is accused of sedition for the writings in the newspaper Kesari, which the British authorities have considered incendiary. Mahatma Gandhi was accused of sedition in 1922 due to the articles he wrote for Young India in which he openly attacked the British regime. Gandhi famously termed Section 124A \"the prince among the political sections of the IPC designed to suppress the liberty of the citizen.\" The use of this law against such revered leaders pointed out its role as a repressive tool during the colonial era. Even post-independence, the sedition law remains on the statute book, even though the makers of the Constitution went out of their way consciously to exclude sedition as a restriction on the right to freedom of speech under Article 19(2). In Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962), the Supreme Court upheld its legality but curtailed it to acts inciting violence or threatening public order. The judgment thus tried to balance both the expectation of stability from the state and the citizens\' right to free speech. Despite such judicial clarifications, the law related to sedition continues to be controversial and is considered a legacy of colonialism control. 3. Constitutional Validity and Judicial Interpretation 5. Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962) A landmark case, which reviewed the constitutional validity of Section 124A, was Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962). The Supreme Court upheld the provision however severely restricted its scope and while holding that only acts which have a tendency to incite violence or create public disorder would fall within the ambit of sedition. The court referred to the fact that such restriction is impermissible so long as it is required to strike the balance between state security and right to free speech. This judgment established an important precedential value inasmuch as it has been held that not all criticisms of the government constitute sedition, but only such an expression which has concrete nexus with incitement of violence or disruption of public order. 6. Balwant Singh v. State of Punjab (1995) This interpretation was further clarified by the Supreme Court in Balwant Singh v. State of Punjab (1995). Acquitting two persons who, immediately after the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, raised pro-Khalistan slogans, the Court held that raising slogans in itself would amount neither to incitement to violence nor to call to create disruption in public order. Once again, this decision highlighted the mandates of intent and effect. 7. Trends of Recent Judicial Precedents Recent judicial trends which include, as seen in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015), when Section 66A of the IT Act was struck down for vagueness, further indicate the tendency of the court to review laws impacting freedom of speech. The trend reveals that Section 124A may be held similarly under strict judicial scrutiny because of its vagueness and the subjective nature of the offense created. 4. Modern Application and Abuse of Sedition Law The modern application of law has elevated widespread claims of abuse. According to the data available in the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), cases pertaining to sedition saw an increase while the rate of conviction continued to be marginally low. It is a fact that law is used more for harassment than securing a conviction. 8. JNU Sedition Case 2016 One of the most prominent cases in recent times is the 2016 JNU sedition case, whereby student leaders were accused of sedition for raising allegedly anti-India slogans during a protest. The charges opened the very debate raging in the country regarding the interpretation of free speech and the limits of political dissent. The case continues to hang in the balance due to the lengthy legal processes normally associated with such cases. 9. Journalists and Activists The section has been grossly misused for silencing voices of dissent by prosecuting journalists and activists. For example, in 2019, journalist Kishore Chandra Wang Khem was held in custody in Manipur for a post on social media he wrote against the Chief Minister. In another instance, environmental activists and government agitators were also slapped with sedition charges, which calls into question whether this is a section that can silence voices of dissent. 10. Farmers\' Protest (2020-2021) Even the charge of sedition came against protesters and journalists, who were covering this movement. It adds more fuel to the criticism that this law is being used for reigning in legitimate protest and dissent. 5. Impact of Sedition Law on Free Speech and Democracy In addition, use of sedition law chills freedom of speech as people are afraid of being charged with an opinion or belief that has been construed to be against the government. This leads to a climate of self-censorship and circumscribes democratic debate. The arbitrary use of sedition law undermines the fundamental right to dissent that is a staple of any democratic society. 11. Impact on Media Freedom and Press Freedom The sedition law has rather badly impacted the free press of India by targeting journalists. Reporters Without Borders and Human Rights Watch have documented the increasing trend to intimidate journalists with the law of sedition, which has caused India\'s decline in the World Press Freedom Index. 12. Chilling Effect on Civil Society Sedition law was used disproportionately against activists working on issues of human rights and social justice. An assortment of draconian laws, including the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in conjunction with sedition law, has created a hostile environment for civil society. 6. Comparative Analysis: Sedition Laws in Other Countries Other nations, including the United Kingdom and Australia, either repealed or amended their own sedition laws. In 2009, the UK Parliament passed a law that abolished the crime of sedition and declared it is an archaic concept for a modern democratic society. Even Australia redefined this crime to apply to acts of terrorism or violent overthrow of the government only. What is scandalous about the Indian sedition law, however is how broad and easy to abuse it remains. This comparative analysis suggests that India\'s sedition law is anachronistic and requires reevaluation toward alignment with democratic norms and international human rights standards. 7. Recommendations for Reform 13. Section 124A Amendment The law should be developed clearly stating what constitutes sedition. It should concentrate only on those activities which motivate violence or a direct threat to the security of the state. 14. Judicial Control Courts should be provided an opportunity to go through all cases of sedition at the preliminary stage so that blatant abuse of the process of law does not proceed. It would thus have provided a check on arbitrary application of the law. 15. Repeal and Substitute Instead, replace section 124A with its repeal and enactment of a more narrowly defined national security law that will not threaten free speech. 8. Conclusion Sedition laws, enacted under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code, have continually presented a strong challenge to free speech and democracy principles. Codified in 1870 as one of the tools adopted by the British in suppression of voices of the Indian freedom fighters, the sedition laws are still carrying on their role in curbing dissent today, post the independence of India. Despite best efforts by the judiciary to restrict the reach of this provision, as evidenced by landmark judgments like Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar and Balwant Singh v. State of Punjab, section 124A has survived its pathetic experience, despite the usage of ambiguous language, and continued being misused against journalists, activists, and political dissenters. Its misuse posed an irony how this provision was incompatible with modern democratic values and enhanced a chilling effect on free speech.\ \ Given the obscurity of this legislation, letting it be able to potentially use to stifle any person exercising the right to freedom of speech under the constitution, this law stands as the obvious contradiction not only to political opposition but in creation of a climate of fear with associated self-censorship. The cases of late have demonstrated that Section 124A is used more frequently for harassment than for public order. It seems to be contrary to the very fabric of a democratic process, which allows healthy debate and criticism against the government.\ \ With this in mind and with changing times and international human rights practices, it becomes imperative to question whether the sedition law remains relevant in such a country as India. This is an opportune time either to abolish or modify section 124-A so that this legislation is on better terms with the democratic ideals of freedom of speech and expression. Such a reform would enforce the rights of citizens stipulated by the constitution but concurrently put more strength into the intent of India\'s commitment towards becoming an India that is alive and inclusive in democracy. **References ** - Constitution of India, 1950. - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 124A. - Constitution of India, 1950. - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 124A. - *Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar*, AIR 1962 SC 955. - *Balwant Singh v. State of Punjab*, (1995) SCC 123. - *Arup Bhuyan v. State of Assam*, (2011) 3 SCC 377. - Human Rights Watch. (2021).