Supreme Court to govt: Can sedition cases be kept in abeyance till review?

Tribune News Service

Satya Prakash

New Delhi, May 10

As the Centre decides to re-examine the law on sedition, the Supreme Court on Tuesday asked it to spell out if all sedition cases filed across India could be kept in abeyance till the review of Section 124A of the IPC was completed.

Editorial: Sedition law

Centre given 24 hours to file response

We will give you time till tomorrow (Wednesday). Our queries are about the pending cases and how the government will take care of future cases.

Govt reply sought on protecting citizens

When govt itself has shown concern about its misuse, how will you protect citizens? There are people who are jailed…. Please clarify. CJI-led Bench

“We are making it very clear. We want instructions. We will give you time till tomorrow. Our specific queries are: first, about pending cases and, the second, as to how the government will take care of future cases…,” a three-judge Bench led by CJI NV Ramana told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta.

The Bench, which was considering if petitions challenging the validity of sedition law should be referred to a seven-judge Bench, sought to know if future sedition cases could be kept in abeyance till the government reviewed the law.

Mehta said the government was reconsidering the desirability of Section 124A. He, however, refused to give a definite time frame to complete the exercise. Mehta said he would take instructions from the government and inform it on Wednesday, when the matter will be taken up again.

As the petitioners demanded that citizens’ interests should be protected by keeping the sedition law in abeyance, the Bench asked the Centre as to why can’t it issue a direction to states not to register FIRs under Section 124A of the IPC till the re-examination process got over.

“Why don’t you instruct the states to not proceed with the matter till the issue is under reconsideration?” said the Bench, which also included Justice Surya Kant and Justice Hima Kohli.

The court’s comments came after Mehta said, “The filing of FIRs and investigation are done by states. The Centre does not do that… There are constitutional remedies available against the misuse of the provision.”

“I don’t think in the history of this country this court passed an order directing a penal provision not being used,” Mehta added. “We can’t ask everyone to go attend courts and be in jail for months. When the government itself has shown concerns about the misuse, how will you protect them? We have to balance... there are people who are jailed and people who are going to be booked…Please make your stand clear on this,” the CJI said. “We should not appear that we are unreasonable. The other day, the AG (Attorney General) said even for chanting Hanuman Chalisa a sedition case was filed. How are we going to protect them?” the Bench asked.

On behalf of the petitioners, senior advocate Kapil Sibal said the court’s exercise of examining the validity of a law can’t be stopped merely because the legislature will take time to reconsider it.

Maintaining that the PM had been cognisant of various views expressed on sedition law, the Centre had on Monday told the Supreme Court that it has decided to “re-examine and re-consider” the provisions of Section 124A of the IPC. The Centre wanted the SCnot to invest time in examining the validity of Section 124A – which was upheld by a five-judge Constitution Bench in Kedar Nath Singh’s case in 1962 — once again and await the outcome of its reconsideration.

About The Author

Tribune News Service

The Tribune News Service brings you the latest news, analysis and insights from the region, India and around the world. Follow the Tribune News Service for a wide-ranging coverage of events as they unfold, with perspective and clarity.

#nv ramana #sedition law