Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code on sedition is currently on hold following a direction issued by the Supreme Court in May 2022
Posted Date – 06:40 AM, Sat – 6/3/23
Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code on sedition is currently on hold following a direction issued by the Supreme Court in May 2022
New Delhi: The Law Commission proposed retaining the penalty clause for sedition, saying its complete repeal would have serious adverse effects on the security and integrity of the country, prompting Congress to reject the proposals where the government called them “persuasive” and “not binding”.
The committee, chaired by Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi (ret.), also recommended that the minimum sentence for incitement be increased to seven years from the current three years, seeking to bring it in line with the punishment scheme for other offenses under the chapter of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). ), dealing with crimes against the State.
Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with sedition, is currently on hold under a Supreme Court directive dated May 2022.
Amid allegations of abuse, there have been calls to repeal the provision.
Congress accused the BJP government of planning to make sedition laws “tougher” and send out a message that would be used against opposition leaders ahead of the general election.
Federal Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal said the Law Commission’s recommendations in its report “Use of Sedition Law” were “persuasive and non-binding” and would be made “informed and reasonable” after consultation with all stakeholders. decision.
The committee also said that demagoguery was a “colonial legacy” and was not a valid reason to abolish it.
It said that to abolish the provision simply because some countries have done so would in essence turn a blind eye to the glaring reality of India’s existence and that it could be preserved with certain safeguards against its abuse.
In the Committee’s view, the existence of counter-terrorism legislation such as the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) does not preclude the need for incitement laws.
In its most recent report to the government, the group said it recognized the perception of abuses of Section 124A and recommended that the Center publish model guidelines to stop them.
“In this context, it is also proposed to incorporate a provision similar to Section 196(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) 1973 (CrPC) proviso to Section 154 CrPC which would provide the necessary procedural safeguards Offenses under Section 124A are referred to the FIR,” the committee chairman said in a cover letter to Meghwal.
The committee also suggested changing the wording of section 124A and adding “inclination to incite violence or to cause public disorder”.
It said the qualifier “inclination to incite violence” would mean “mere inclination to incite violence or to cause public disorder, not evidence of actual violence or imminent threat of violence”.
The Law Commission now recommends that this section be amended to read: “Whoever uses words,
Whether orally or in writing, or by signs, or by apparent representation, or otherwise, arouses or attempts to arouse hatred or contempt, or arouses or attempts to arouse discontent against the lawfully established Government of India, and is inclined to incite violence or causing public disorder, shall be sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine, or to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than seven years and a fine, or a fine. While certain procedural guidelines must be in place to deter law enforcement authorities from misusing section 124A to deal with sedition, any allegation of misuse of the section cannot imply a call for its repeal, the report said.
In its report to Megwar, the Law Commission also said that the existence of laws such as the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and the National Security Act did not imply coverage of all elements of offenses envisaged by Section 124A of the IPC.
“Furthermore, in the absence of provisions like Section 124A of the IPC, any speech inciting violence against the government would be tried under special laws and anti-terrorism legislation, which contains stricter provisions for dealing with defendants,” the report used Sedition Act,” said.
“The message of the colonialist mindset has been conveyed that there will be distance between the rulers and the ruled, and through this,” Congress Speaker Abhishek Singhvi told a news conference at the AICC headquarters here. This law, the foundations of the republic will be uprooted. The message has been sent before the elections and we will exploit this in a unilateral way, especially against opposition leaders.”
