On Monday, the Supreme Court took a dig at sedition cases against anyone critical of the government, by wondering if any such case had been filed against a TV channel which showed people throwing a Covid-19 patient’s body into a river in Uttar Pradesh recently.
A three-judge bench led by Justice DY Chandrachud made the sarcastic remarks during a hearing on Monday on the challenges posed by Covid-19. The court’s attention was drawn to the lack of dignity shown to those who died of the infectious disease.
The Supreme Court has observed to define what is or is not sedition will help minimise the misuse of the colonial-era provision to punish dissent.
The apex court made this observation while restraining the Andhra Pradesh government from taking adverse action against two Telugu news channels, which have been booked under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for allegedly promoting disaffection against the state government. The court’s dissatisfaction with this provision was also clear in April when it sought a response from the Centre on a plea challenging the constitutional validity of the law.
Though the word sedition was dropped from the Constitution in 1949, Section 124A of IPC defines its scope as the intent or tendency to disturb law and order or words which seem to incite violence. The SC’s position should invite unqualified support. The State must safeguard its security and sovereignty, but it must also protect the fundamental rights of its citizens. Flimsy sedition charges are often invoked to intimidate and silence those who dissent.
According to the National Crime Records Bureau, only 3% of the 93 cases filed in 2019 ended in convictions, suggesting that there was not enough evidence to uphold the charges. India has a legal architecture to deal with those trying to incite violence or threaten the integrity of the State. As India heads towards 75 years of Independence next year, it is only appropriate that SC has weighed in to distinguish between sedition and the democratic right of citizens to express dissent without being labelled enemies of the State.
Source Link
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure.
0 Comments