In British Era, Section 124 A was not a part of Indian Penal Code, 1860. But this Section was inserted into IPC by the IPC Act, 1870. By an amending act of 1898, this provision was later replaced by Section 124 A. According to the British Era Law, under the old IPC, “Exciting or attempting to excite feelings of disaffection was considered as Sedition”.
Section 124A of IPC, 1860 deals with the Law of Sedition, which is considered as a reasonable restriction on the freedom of speech and expression.
The Indian Penal Code under Section 124 A defines sedition as an offence committed when “any person 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 India”.
However, any comments that show disapproval of any actions or steps or administrative actions taken by the Government, which have been made with an intent to ensure the Government alters the steps taken by it would not be considered as sedition provided that such statements do not excite or attempt to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection towards the Government.
That judgment went into the issue of whether the law on sedition is consistent with the fundamental right under Article 19 which guarantees each citizen’s freedom of speech and expression.
The Supreme Court laid down that every citizen has a right to say or write about the government, by way of criticism or comment, as long as it does not “incite people to violence” against the government established by law or with the intention of creating public disorder.
The court observed, “It is clear that the provisions of Section 124 A of IPC cannot be invoked to penalise criticism of the persons for the time being engaged in carrying on administration or strong words used to express disapprobation of the measures of the government with a view to their improvement or alteration by lawful means.”.
In democratic India, the citizens must be given liberty to express their affection towards the Nation in their own way which may be in the form of debates, exposure of the loopholes in the policy of the government, constructive criticisms etc. Section 124 A, the law of sedition must only be carefully applied in cases where the intention of such actions lies with the purpose to disrupt the public order or overthrow the government by way of illegal or extremist means of violence.
A clear distinction between freedom of speech and expression concerning Sedition could be reviewed in the Courts of law as the concept of sedition is a very specific and serious offence and when used upon to silence and terrorize an ordinary citizen, raising a concern/ grievance, it is terrorism imposed by the State.
There is still a debate whether such law should remains in Indian society or not some call it draconian and outdated but that is still a debate which goes on forever.
Aishwarya Says:
I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.
If you are interested in participating in the same, do let me know.
Do follow me on Facebook, Twitter Youtube and Instagram.
The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.
If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at adv.aishwaryasandeep@gmail.com
We also have a Facebook Group Restarter Moms for Mothers or Women who would like to rejoin their careers post a career break or women who are enterpreneurs.