Sedition law| SC asks govt plan on existing pending cases under law during reconsideration

Representative image

The Supreme Court on May 10 asked the government to make its position clear about how it intends to protect the people facing sedition charges under existing law. The court has granted time till Wednesday to the government to take instructions on the issue.

The court has asked the government whether the use of existing sedition law will be kept in abeyance till the government’s reconsideration process.

After the government urged the court to defer the hearing on the case, the petitioners led by Senior Counsel Kapil Sibal took objection to the government’s plea. Sibal argued that the court must proceed with its hearing regardless of the law’s reconsideration before another jurisdiction, which in the case is the legislature.

On being asked by the court about the tentative timeline within which the reconsideration will be done, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the court that while the accurate timeline cannot be ascertained right now, the process has begun. Mehta urged the court to take note of the tenor and intent behind the affidavit.

Sibal highlighted however that even if the executive was to reconsider the law, there remain several pending prosecutions under the existing law while many new arrests too are being made where Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code is being slapped. The pattern of arrests continues, Senior Counsel CU Singh also added in support of Sibal’s argument.

“We will take into consideration that the government has taken cognizance of the issue and reconsidering the law,” CJI NV Ramana observed. “But there are many concerns including pending cases,” the CJI said asking Mehta about the government’s proposition to protect such individual matters.

“When the government itself has expressed concern about misuse, and liberties, then how will you (government) protect these people,” the bench asked. “We also have to balance the issue of pending cases of people who are in prisons. Please make your stand clear on this,” the court urged the government counsel.

The court suggested the government consider issuing a directive to the states to keep in abeyance the use of the penal provision on sedition for the time being. Mehta assured the court that he would seek instructions on the issue of guidelines.

In what can be seen as a significant development, the union government yesterday had filed an affidavit before the Supreme Court informing the top court that the government would re-examine and reconsider the sedition law. As such, the court must defer hearing the batch of petitions that challenge the validity of this law before the country’s highest court, the government had urged.

This decision for reconsideration, according to center’s affidavit, is a part of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s effort to shed the baggage of colonial laws under which the Modi government has already scrapped 1,500 outdated laws.

The law on sedition must be reconsidered before an appropriate forum and the government would undertake this exercise keeping in mind the civil liberties and human rights of the citizenry while balancing the same with the nation’s integrity and sovereignty, the Supreme Court was told in the affidavit.

The decision to reconsider the law is a departure from the government’s previous stance it took earlier this month wherein the Supreme Court was told that the law was well settled in a precedent laid down by a constitution bench of the apex court itself. As such, the law needed no reconsideration, the government had said then.

The discourse around law on sedition assumed significance after this colonial law was used against members of the civil society, journalists, activists, and students among others during various protest movements under the current regime. The stark increase in use of sedition law against the citizens also led to the issue coming before the Supreme Court through a number of petitions.

The batch of petitions before the court by and large question the need for a colonial and “draconian” law such as Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code and challenge its constitutional validity considering its increased and allegedly loose use by the authorities.

While the Supreme Court issued notice on these petitions in 2021 expressing intent to hear the petitions, the first question the court needed to consider was whether a constitution bench of five or more judges needed to decide on the question. This is because the precedent laid down in 1962 wherein the Supreme Court upheld the validity of this law was a ruling rendered by a bench of five judges.

Currently, a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India NV Ramana is hearing this batch of petitions.