Consultations on relook at sedition law at advanced stage, Centre tells SC

“Learned Attorney General states that in pursuance of the order dated May 11, 2022, the government has initiated the process of re-examining the provisions of Section 124A of IPC and consultations are at substantially advanced stage. In view of the above statement and on the request of the Attorney General, we direct that these proceedings may be posted in the second week of August,” the Bench said.

AG Venkataramani told the Bench that the process was on and “once it is finalised before it goes to Parliament, probably they will come back to me about what exactly (is) the shape of the provision to come”.

As the Bench agreed to adjourn the hearing to know the government stance, the AG requested that it may be fixed for hearing in August, saying “the government is also very keen to push it as early as possible” and “in the monsoon session, probably something may happen”.

Earlier, during the hearing, some of the petitioner counsel said the court may have to refer the matter to a seven-judge constitution bench in view of the observations in the 1962 Kedar Nath Singh judgment. A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court had in that case, while upholding Section 124A, tried to prevent its misuse by laying down what amounts to sedition and what does not.

Responding to the petitions challenging the sedition law, the Centre had in May 2022 told the apex court that it is “fully cognizant of the various views” on the subject and “has decided to re-examine and re-consider the provisions of Section 124A”. It urged the bench to defer the hearing on petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the law until such exercise is carried out “before an appropriate forum”. It also urged the court to defer the hearing until the time the exercise is completed.

Taking the government stand on record, a three-judge bench presided by the then CJI N V Ramana had on May 11, 2022, put on hold trial in all sedition cases pending before courts across the country until the government completes its promised exercise “to re-examine and re-consider the provisions of Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code” dealing with the offence.

Referring to the government stand, the court order had further said “it is clear that the Union of India agrees with the prima facie opinion expressed by this court that the rigours of Section 124A of IPC is not in tune with the current social milieu, and was intended for a time when this country was under the colonial regime. In light of the same, the Union of India may reconsider the aforesaid provision of law”.

The court said it is “cognizant of the security interests and integrity of the State on one hand, and the civil liberties of citizens on the other”.

“There is a requirement to balance both sets of considerations, which is a difficult exercise. The case of the petitioners is that this provision of law dates back to 1898, and pre-dates the Constitution itself, and is being misused,” it had said.

The bench pointed out that the then Attorney General K K Venugopal, too, had “on an earlier date of hearing, given some instances of glaring misuse of this provision, like in the case of recital of the Hanuman Chalisa (slapping sedition charges against two legislators in Maharashtra over recital of the prayer)”.

“Therefore, we expect that, till the re-examination of the provision is complete, it will be appropriate not to continue the usage of the aforesaid provision of law by the governments,” the May 11 order said.