Breaking News

latest

Indian sedition law and its history | Postponement of Indian Sedition Act

 Indian sedition law and its history | Postponement of Indian Sedition Act | Bharat ka rajdroh kayda information Indian sedition law and its...

 Indian sedition law and its history | Postponement of Indian Sedition Act | Bharat ka rajdroh kayda information


Indian sedition law and its history 


On May 11, 2022, the Supreme Court granted a landmark decision to suspend the sedition law. The court ordered the government to suspend all pending cases under the Act, saying no treason charges should be filed until the British-era law is reconsidered.


Chief Justice N. V. Ramana's bench passed the order. The bench comprises Justices Suryakant and Hema Kohli.


Taking into account the points raised by the Central Government in this regard, the bench clarified that section 124 (a) of the Indian Penal Code, which is not applicable in the present social environment, allows reconsideration of this provision.




Macaulay explained:


Lord Macaulay had defined treason as the English of education in India. Thomas Macaulay, who drafted the Indian Penal Code, had included the Sedition Act, but it was not added to the Code enacted in 1860.


In 1870, treason was added to the IPC as section 124A. The British used it to suppress the writings and speeches of prominent Indian freedom fighters. Legalization of treason by the United Kingdom


(Britain) canceled in 2009. There is no separate law on treason, but it is mentioned in section 124A of the Indian Penal Code.




The Constituent Assembly had protested:


According to the 2018 report of the Law Commission of India, the Constituent Assembly had opposed the inclusion of the treason clause in the drafting of the Constitution.


The report states that section 124A should be applied only in cases of violence and illegal disturbances of peace or conspiracy to overthrow the government.


The Commission is of the view that Section 124A should be retained, but the word 'treason' should be considered in it. Also, a balance must be struck between treason and freedom of speech.




 What happened in Parliament?


In 2011, when the UPA government was in power, Communist Party of India leader D Raja introduced a private members' bill in the Rajya Sabha, calling for the repeal of Section 124A. However, the bill could not be passed.


In 2015, Congress MP Shashi Tharoor introduced the Private Members' Bill in the Lok Sabha to amend Section 124A.




History of law:


1870 - The British enact a sedition clause in the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The sedition law was used in India to convict and punish freedom fighters. E.g. Bal Gangadhar Tilak was the first person (1897) to be convicted of treason in colonial India.


In 1922, Mahatma Gandhi was arrested in Mumbai on charges of treason for participating in the agitation against the colonial government. He was sentenced to six years in prison.

1948 - In a discussion, Indian leaders agree to exclude 'treason' from the constitution.

The Constitution of India adopted on November 26, 1949 did not include treason. However Section 124A remains in the IPC.

1951 Nehru government introduces first amendment under section 19 (1) (a) and speech. Imposed 'reasonable restrictions' on the right to liberty.

In the 1962 Kedarnath case, the bench upheld the validity of the Sedition Act.

In 1974, the Indira Gandhi government made Section 124A a cognizable offense. This gave the police the right to make arrests without a warrant.




Section 124 (a):


 "Anyone who, by word or deed, or by gestures or gestures, or in any other way, attempts to incite hatred or animosity or incite discontent, is charged with treason."


It is a non-bailable offense and carries a maximum sentence of three years to life imprisonment if convicted. Also fines may be levied. 'Treason' and 'treason' are often considered the same thing, but when the government is slandered or insulted, it is called 'treason' and when the country is slandered or insulted, it is called 'treason'. Section 124A is applied in both the cases.

No comments