Repealing sedition law

OFTEN misused against activists and journalists, the archaic sedition law is all set to become history. Union Home Minister Amit Shah — who introduced three Bills in the Lok Sabha on Friday to replace the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Criminal Procedure Code and the Indian Evidence Act — announced that the sedition law had been proposed to be removed. The decision comes as a pleasant surprise as barely two months ago, the

Law Commission had recommended retention of Section 124A (sedition) of the IPC and enhancement of punishment for the offence. Citing its misuse and the resultant ‘chilling effect’, the Supreme Court had in May last year put the sedition law on hold, pending a review.

Absent from the original IPC, which was drafted by Lord Macaulay and came into force in 1862, the sedition law was added in 1870. It was widely used to suppress the freedom struggle after its ambit was expanded in 1898. The Punjab High Court had in Tara Singh Gopi Chand vs The State (1951) declared Section 124A IPC unconstitutional, but the Supreme Court upheld its validity in Kedarnath Singh (1962), while restricting its scope.

However, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — which will replace the IPC — proposes to have a provision that punishes ‘acts endangering sovereignty, unity and integrity of India’ with life imprisonment or imprisonment up to seven years and a fine. One hopes it’s not the sedition law by another name. Doing away with this law is not a standalone measure. It’s part of an overhaul of the criminal justice system undertaken by the government, two decades after Justice VS Malimath Committee on Reforms of Criminal Justice System submitted its report to the Home Ministry. There is a lot that can be changed in procedural laws. But the government should tread cautiously while redrafting the substantive criminal law.