By Krishna Jha
On June 1, there had been reports that the law panel backed the penal provision for the offence of sedition, saying repealing it altogether could have adverse ramifications for the security and integrity of the country. The offence of sedition has been stretched up to even “…mere inclination to incite violence or cause public disorder rather than proof of actual violence or imminent threat to violence” and would be sufficient ground for punishment.
The government has sought time to submit its response to petition challenging the constitutional validity of section 124 A of the Indian Penal code dealing with the offence of sedition. In the light of rising number of cases under sedition law, which has gone up to 28 percent, adding 559 cases, a rapid increase in the years of 2014-2020, the apex court had intervened in 2021.
The CJI has questioned why a colonial law used against Mahatma Gandhi and Bal Gangadhar Tilak continues to survive in law book even after 75 years of independence. The CJI said that sedition or section 124 A of the IPC was prone to the misuse by the government. Sedition law were enacted in 17th century England when lawmakers believed that only good opinions about the government should survive, as all bad observations were detrimental to the government. The law was originally drafted in 1837 by Thomas Macaulay, the British historian politician, but was inexplicably omitted when the IPC was enacted in 1860. Section 124 A was inserted in 1870 by an amendment introduced by Sir James Stephen when it felt the need for a specific section to deal with the offence. Today Sedition is a crime under section 124 A of the IPC, defined as an offence committed against the ruling regime.
The Law Commission of India has recommended enhancing the jail term in sedition cases from a minimum of three years to seven years, contending that it would allow courts greater room to award punishment in accordance with the scale and gravity of the act committed. In a report on the ‘Usage of the Law of Sedition’, the Commission said its earlier report had termed the punishment for Section 124A (law of sedition) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) “very odd” as it has provisions for either life imprisonment or a three-year jail term, but nothing in between.
The minimum punishment under the sedition law is paying fine.
“A comparison of the sentences as provided for offences in Chapter VI of the IPC suggests that there is a glaring disparity in the punishment prescribed for Section 124A,” the Commission said.
Chapter VI of the IPC deals with offences against the state.
“It is, therefore, suggested that the provision be revised to bring it in consonance with the scheme of punishment provided for other offences under Chapter VI. This would allow the courts greater room to award punishment for a case of sedition in accordance with the scale and gravity of the act committed,” the report said.
The Commission also suggested changes to the phrasing of Section 124A and added words “a tendency to incite violence or cause public disorder”.
The current Section 124A of IPC reads as follows: “Sedition-Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards, the Government established by law in lndia, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added.”
However, the law commission has now recommended to alter the Section as: “Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards, the Government established by law in lndia, with a tendency to incite violence or cause public disorder shall be punished with imprisonment for life, to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, to which fine may be added, or with fine.”
The Commission said the expression ‘tendency’ would mean mere inclination to incite violence or cause public disorder rather than proof of actual violence or imminent threat to violence. The report of the Law Commission has been completed and submitted to the concerned minister.
In fact Law Commission’s backing of Section 124 A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC ), pertaining to sedition, in itself shows that the BJP government has been planning to make the law more “draconian”. The government is keen to convey the hard message before the next general election. There is allegation that the BJP would be using the sedition law as a tool of “subversing, subjugating, and silencing dissent”. There is also the question raised why the government has gone on to make the law more stringent when the Supreme Court has been rendering it inoperative. Law commission has under lined that there will be a distance between the ruler and the ruled, and through this law, the foundations of the republic will be uprooted. (IPA Service)
The post Law Commission’s Backing Of Section 124A Of Sedition Law Is Disappointing first appeared on IPA Newspack.
