Sedition in India: Section 124 A of IPC vs Freedom of Speech

The fact that these laws were adopted during a time when we were under the control of an imperialist occupying force from another country should be the aspect of the sedition law that you remember as being the most essential. The fundamental objective of the British government was to deprive the people living in this country of their liberties, most notably the liberty to express their individual viewpoints.Sedition was viewed in a different light after the amendment to section 124A, which took place in the year 1898. In the first sentence, the crime of sedition is defined as instigating or trying to incite feelings of discomfort with the government.Sedition is still a relatively uncommon crime in comparison to other types of criminal activity; it only accounts for a fraction of one percent of all offences listed in the IPC. On the other hand, certain regions in India are developing a reputation as breeding grounds for subversion.

“History of Sedition Law in India”

The history of India’s sedition law is quite fascinating. In the year 1860, the Indian Penal Code was becoming law in colonial India; nevertheless, it did not include a provision on sedition. It was brought back into the IPC in 1870 on the basis that it had been accidentally removed from the first draught of the code. In a related development, the United Kingdom is planning to repeal the statute in Britain only in 2009, with effects starting in early 2010.The institution of criminal punishment proved to be useful in silencing nationalist voices and calls for freedom. The long list of India’s national heroes, including Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Mahatma Gandhi, Bhagat Singh, and Jawaharlal Nehru, who emerged as accused in cases of sedition is rather extensive.In the history of India’s colonial era, Bal Gangadhar Tilak holds the distinction of becoming the first person to be found guilty of sedition. The charge was brought against Tilak by the British government, which alleged that articles published in Tilak’s Marathi daily Kesari would encourage other people to sabotage the efforts of the Indian government to control the plague epidemic. Tilak was found guilty of sedition by the high court in Bombay in 1897 and received a sentence of 18 months in prison for his actions under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code. Tilak was found guilty by a jury of nine people, six of whom were white and three of whom were Indian. The three Indian jurors voted in Tilak’s favour, while the six white jurors voted against him. Both the Federal Court, that started operating in 1937, and the Privy Council, which was the final court of appeal situated in London, provided later interpretations of Section 124A that were distinct from one another.

“Section 124A of IPC – Sedition”

According to section 124A of the Indian Penal Code, the crime of sedition is decided to commit whenever a person, through words or even other actions, gives or effort to put into contempt or to excite disaffection the government that has been established by law, or when that person inspires or tries to excite hatred or contempt towards the government.The definition of “disaffection” has been expanded to cover both disloyalty and all emotions of animosity, however comments that do not inspire or attempt to excite hatred, contempt, or disaffection will not be considered an offence under the three justifications that have been added to the section. A life sentence in prison, with or without the possibility of a fine, is the maximum penalty for the crime of seditious libel, which, according to the law, is a cognizable offence that cannot be released on bail and cannot be compounded.

“Cases Related to Sedition Law in India”

In Tara Singh Gopi Chand Vs The State (1951), the Punjab high court challenged sedition law for the first time in independent India. The high court ruled that Section 124A was an unconstitutional restriction on free speech and expression under Article 19 of India’s Constitution. This ruling caused the Jawaharlal Nehru government to adopt further restrictions on free speech.In 1954, the Patna high court affirmed Section 124A, ruling that it does not infringe Article 19. Four years later, in Ram Nandan Vs State, the Allahabad high court declared Section 124A unlawful and held that the administration must be ready to face strong resistance separate from popular support or rejection.

As per the information that was submitted on the website of the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), cases of sedition under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act demonstrated significant increase in 2019. However, only three percent of the sedition throughout the in judgements.In comparison to the previous year, the numbers of sedition cases filed in 2019 increased by 25 percent, while the number of arrests increased by 41 percent. In 2019, there were a total of 93 cases of sedition that were reported, leading to 96 arrests and charge sheets being filed in 76 cases. This compares to 70 cases, 56 arrests, and 27 charge sheets in the previous year.

In February, the Ministry of Home Affairs provided the Rajya Sabha with a written response in which it stated that out of the 96 people who were detained for sedition in 2019, just two were guilty of the offence, while the remaining 29 were acquitted.

Conclusion

In common parlance, sedition is defined as the commission of an offence by any individual who, via the use of words, signs, or acts, attempts or brings about any emotion of hatred or feeling of disaffection in the public towards the government. Sedition is an offence that is considered to have been committed when someone incites or seeks to stir hatred or contempt in those other people against the government that has been constituted in accordance with the law. It is essential for incitement to result in violent behaviour among members of the general population. The instigation can take the form of words spoken aloud, words written down, a symbol, or any other form that is somehow connected to the situation.