Govt hints at revision in sedition law; may take it up in Parliament

Stating that “some changes” in the 152-year-old penal provision of sedition could happen before the next parliament session, the Union government on Monday assured the Supreme Court that the colonial-era law would continue to remain on hold until the process of reviewing the provision is complete.

“There is thinking on the subject and some change may happen before the winter session of the parliament...Hopefully before the next parliament session, something may happen,” attorney general R Venkataramani submitted before a bench led by Chief Justice of India Uday Umesh Lalit.

The submission of the top law officer came three days after Union home minister Amit Shah made a statement at a meeting of home ministers of all states that the government plans to introduce drafts on new Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and Indian Penal Code (IPC) in parliament.

Also read: Those using two-finger test for rape survivors should be prosecuted: SC

“Various suggestions have been received regarding improvement in CrPC and IPC. I am looking into it in detail, invested hours in it. We will very soon come up with new CrPC, IPC drafts in parliament,” Shah said on October 27.

On Monday, when the bench took up a bunch of petitions challenging the validity of sedition law on grounds of infringement of fundamental rights and its rampant abuse, the AG requested for some more time to convey the outcome of the review of Section 124A (sedition) in the IPC which is punishable with jail term ranging from three years to the life term.

At this, the bench, which also comprised justices S Ravindra Bhat and Bela M Trivedi, agreed to give more time to the Centre to complete the exercise but sought to know whether appropriate guidelines had been issued to the states and Union territories in terms of its order in May when the court put Section 124A on hold “to protect people” from arrests until the government reviews the law.

Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, who also appeared for the Centre, responded that sufficient guidelines have been issued to all states and UTs to ensure complete compliance with the May order.

Venkataramani added that the interim order by the court is operating effectively and that there is no transgression that has been brought to the notice of the authorities. “We will be in a state to say something concrete after the next parliament session,” the AG added.

The bench then agreed to adjourn the matter to the second week in January and recorded the AG’s statement that the matter is still engaging the attention of the relevant authorities and that additional time was required so that appropriate steps could be taken by the government in this regard.

“He assures the court that in view of the interim directions issued by the court, every interest and concern stand protected, and as such there would be no prejudice caused. Learned AG also submits that appropriate directives have been issued to all state governments,” the court recorded in its order.

On May 11, the court put the sedition law in abeyance, saying it must balance civil liberty and sovereignty of the state in the wake of several instances of abuse of the law.

“It will be appropriate not to use this provision of law till further re-examination is over. We hope and expect the Centre and states will desist from registering any FIR [First Information Report] under Section 124A or initiate proceedings under the same till the re-examination is over,” stated the May 11 order while giving the Centre liberty to issue suitable guidelines to states and UTs in this regard.

Also read: Welcome step by SC to safeguard dignity

The interim order came two days after the government informed the court about its decision to “re-examine and reconsider” Section 124A, as it underscored Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s impetus on the protection of civil liberties and the need to shed “colonial baggage”.

At the same time, the Centre urged the court to pause the ongoing proceedings indefinitely to await the outcome of the review. While the court agreed to pause the judicial scrutiny of Section 124A in view of the government’s stance, it virtually suspended the operation of the law to ward off arrest and prosecution of people under the sedition law through its May order.

The court is hearing petitions, filed separately by former army officer SG Vombatkere, Editors’ Guild of India, Trinamool Congress lawmaker Mahua Moitra, NGO People’s Union for Civil Liberties, and some journalists, for striking down Section 124A.