[BREAKING] Supreme Court dismisses plea challenging validity of Sedition law under Section 124A IPC

The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a petition challenging the validity of Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code which criminalises sedition. .A three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice of India, SA Bobde said that the petitioners are not affected parties and have no cause of action to challenge the contentious provision. .The petition filed by three advocates Aditya Ranjan, Varun Thakur and V Elanchezhiyan has contended that the sedition law is a colonial relic which was used by the British against Indian Freedom fighters like Mahatma Gandhi and Bal Gangadhar Tilak. .It is now being used to stifle freedom of speech and expression and threaten the life and liberty of Indian citizens if they choose to express dissent against policies of government in power, the plea states. .It is the case of the petitioners that a colonial provision like section 124A which was intended to subjugate the subjects of British crown should not be permitted to continue in a democratic republic, under the continuously expanding scope of the fundamental rights..“Log kya kehenge; The moment sedition case is slapped against a person, a judge does not want to give him bail:” Justice Atul Sreedharan.The petitioners have submitted that the indiscriminate and unlawful use of the Section 124A against Journalists, women, children, students and other persons was in clear defiance of the interpretation of the provision given by the Apex Court of India..According to the petition, the continuance of a draconian colonial provision like Section 124-A without corresponding safeguards as provided under the UAPA is unreasonable and unwarranted. .The plea states that the law does not lay down any institutional responsibility on the Police in case of its misuse and no procedural safeguards are available under the Code of Criminal Procedure unlike UAPA. .State needs to be more tolerant and circumspect while invoking laws on sedition and religious disaffection: Punjab & Haryana High Court."Therefore, section 124-A needs to be examined under the changed facts and circumstances and also on the anvil of ever-evolving tests of necessity, proportionality and arbitrariness," the plea filed through Advocate Sanjay Pathak reads..The petitioner has therefore prayed for striking down Section 124A or in the alternative to give strict directions to the Central and State government to instruct their respective Heads of Police to follow the restrictions laid down by the Supreme Court in Kedar Nath case and Balwant Singh v. State of Punjab.