A three-judge bench of Chief Justice NV Ramana and Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli of the Supreme Court on Thursday began hearing a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the sedition law.
While the Centre sought more time to clarify its stand, Attorney General KK Venugopal, who is assisting the top court, said some new guidelines can be laid down.
Addressing the court, Venugopal said the sedition law should not be stuck down but there is a need for guidelines on the section. “What is permissible, what is impermissible and what can come under sedition needs to be seen,” he said.
He added: “We need guidelines on this section; what is permissible and what is impermissible and what can come under sedition. See what is happening in this country, yesterday sedition was used against people who recited Hanuma Chalisa.” Venugopal was referring to lawmakers Navneet Rana and Ravi Rana being booked for sedition over the Hanuman Chalisa row in Maharashtra.
The bench said the matter will be taken up at 2pm on Tuesday next week and the government and the petitioners will be permitted to argue for an hour on the limited aspect of reference to larger bench.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that the AG’s stand might be different from the Central government’s and that he will place the Central government’s stand before the Supreme Court in two days.
In April last year, the top court had asked the Centre why it was not repealing the provision used by the British to silence people like Mahatma Gandhi to suppress the freedom movement as it expressed concern over the misuse of the colonial-era penal law.
Agreeing to examine the pleas filed by the Editors Guild of India and a former Major-General S G Vombatkere, challenging the Constitutionality of Section 124A (sedition) in the IPC, the top court had said its main concern was the “misuse of law” leading to rise in number of cases.
In April 2021, another bench led by Justice UU Lalit had issued notice on a petition filed by two journalists challenging Section 124A IPC. A petition filed by journalists Patricia Mukhim and Anuradha Bhasin on the same issue are also pending.
The non-bailable provision makes any speech or expression that brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the government established by law in India a criminal offence punishable with a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
“If you see history of charging this section, conviction rate is very low. The enormous power of misuse of this section can be compared with a carpenter given a saw. Instead of cutting a tree, he cuts the entire forest,” the bench had then observed.
Read all the Latest India News here
Comments
0 comment