The Supreme Court on Wednesday fixed May 5 for final hearing of the petitions challenging the constitutionality of the sedition law and made it clear that it will not brook any delay in the form of requests for adjournment.
A three-judge Bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) N.V. Ramana scheduled the case for May 5 for final disposal after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Union of India, sought two or three days to file a counter-affidavit to the petitions.
Attorney General K.K. Venugopal is assisting the court in the case in the capacity of his constitutional office.
Initially, the Bench scheduled the case for hearing on the whole of May 5 and May 6. But Mr. Mehta pointed out that May 6 is a Friday and usually reserved for hearing miscellaneous cases.
The CJI, however, said the case would be heard on May 5 for the entirety of court hours. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal would lead the petitioners’ side.
Several petitions
Several petitions have been filed, one lately by senior journalists like Patricia Mukhim and Anuradha Bhasin, highlighting the freedom of the Press, cartoonist Aseem Trivedi, and one separately by the Editors Guild of India, NGO Common Cause, former Minister Arun Shourie and prominent citizens like retired General S.G. Vombatkere, among others challenging the colonial law.
Last year, the CJI himself voiced what could be an unprecedented judicial criticism of the way sedition was used by the government to crush liberties. He questioned why a colonial law used against Mahatma Gandhi and Bal Gangadhar Tilak continued to survive in the law book after 75 years of Independence.
“Sedition is a colonial law. It suppresses freedoms. It was used against Mahatma Gandhi, Tilak... Is this law necessary after 75 years of Independence?” Chief Justice Ramana, heading a three-judge Bench, had orally addressed Mr. Venugopal and Mr. Mehta.
‘Prone to misuse by govt’
The CJI had said sedition or Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code was prone to misuse by the government. “The use of sedition is like giving a saw to the carpenter to cut a piece of wood and he uses it to cut the entire forest itself,” he had noted.
The CJI’s oral statement in open court takes a significant note amidst rising public denouncement of Central and State law enforcement agencies using the sedition law to silence dissent, muffle free expression and for denying bail to incarcerated activists, journalists, students and civil society members.
A number of petitions have been filed highlighting the “chilling effect” sedition has on the fundamental right of free speech. The CJI’s remarks has also opened the floor for debate and introspection on the court’s own judgment in 1962, in the Kedar Nath case, which upheld Section 124A.
The CJI had drawn the attention of the Attorney General to the conviction rates under sedition. “If you look at the history of use of this Section 124A of IPC, you will find that the conviction rate is very low. There is misuse of power by executive agencies,” he had said.
Mental trauma
Outside the court, several former judges, including Justice Madan B. Lokur, had highlighted the mental trauma afflicted on the families of activists, journalists and civil society members accused of sedition under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and left to languish in jail for months.
Justice Lokur had questioned the morality of a society where the families and friends of incarcerated people have to face barbs about their loved ones being branded traitors for expressing their dissent.
