“(If) some party doesn’t want to hear the voice of other party they may use this type of law and implicate other people. It’s a serious question for (freedom of) individuals,” the Apex Court further remarked.
TFM Desk
Supreme Court on Thursday expressed alarm at the rampant misuse of sedition law in the country. CJI NV Ramana also expressed reservation at continuing the use of the provision (Section 124A of IPC), inserted during the colonial era in 1870, purportedly to curb dissent.
The same law is now being misused when someone does not like the views of another person and there is no accountability from the executive, Chief Justice of India NV Ramana observed.
“Dispute is it is a colonial law and was used by British and suppress freedoms and used against Mahatma Gandhi Bal Gangadhar Tilak. Is this law still needed after 75 years of independence? Our concern is misuse of the law and no accountability of the executive,” CJI Ramana said.
If police wants to fix somebody, they can invoke Section 124A and everybody is a little scared when this Section is invoked, the Court added.
The Court was hearing a plea filed by retired army veteran SG Vombatkere challenging the provision contending that it violates freedom of speech and expression and is disproportionate to the object it seeks to achieve.
According to a report by Bar and Bench, the Apex Court had, on Wednesday, sought the assistance of Attorney General in the matter
When the case came up for hearing on Thursday, Attorney General KK Venugopal opined that it might not be necessary to strike down the provision.
“This section need not be struck down and only guidelines be set out so that section meets its legal purpose,” AG submitted.
The Court said that many pre-independence laws have been repealed by the government except the provision on sedition.
“The government has repealed a number of laws now. I don’t know why you are not looking into this,” the Court said.
“(If) some party doesn’t want to hear the voice of other party they may use this type of law and implicate other people. It’s a serious question for (freedom of) individuals,” the Court further remarked.
The Bench which also comprised Justices AS Bopanna and Hrishikesh Roy then issued notice to the Central government in the matter.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta accepted notice on behalf of the Centre.
It may be mentioned that a Bench headed by Justice UU Lalit is also hearing a plea, as well as Intervention Applications, challenging the constitutional validity of Section 124A of the IPC. On 30 April, the Court had issued notice in the plea filed by two journalists working in the States of Manipur and Chhattisgarh (Kishorchandra Wangkhemcha and another versus Union of India)