My Country’s Cry for ‘Aazadi’ is not Seditious

YASIR ALVI

India’s law on sedition (Section 124A of IPC) has often come under the most severe criticisms not just by various jurists but also by international bodies like the Amnesty International. Section 124A of IPC is a relic of colonial legacy, unsuited in a democracy and a constraint on the legitimate exercise of constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech and expression.

The Law Commission of India has very rightly said, “An expression of frustration over the state of affairs cannot be treated as sedition”. If the country is not open to positive criticism, there would be no difference between the pre and post-Independence eras. Hence, to safeguard the rights of the Indian citizenry the Indian courts have come out, time and again to explain what the law actually means.

The Chief Justice of the Indian Federal Court, which functioned as the highest court in India under the British, Justice Maurice Gwyer observed that a mare slogan or a speech will not be listed under sedition until it results in violence. The same observation was laid down by the Indian Supreme Court in the Kedarnath Case in 1962 and again reiterated by it in the Common Cause vs. Union of India in 2016.

A crucial case here is the 1995 Balwant Singh vs. State of Punjab wherein after Mrs. Gandhi’s assassination, Balwant Singh raised slogans like “Khalistan Zindabad”, “Raj Karega Khalsa” and “Hun Mauka Aya Hai Raj Kayam Karan Da”. The matter went to the SC which decided that such sloganeering which doesn’t result in any reciprocation is not sedition.

The above can be supported by the most relevant cases of them all i.e. Nazir Khan and Ors. vs State of Delhi (2003). Here the Supreme Court observed that it is the Fundamental Right of every citizen to have a political theory of his/her own or to have strong faith in one. And for the propagation of which he/she utters that they shall “fight” to achieve their goals, such utterance, said the court, would not be treated as sedition.

Hence, it is crucial to note that, since government is just one part of the state, criticism of it is not equivalent to criticism of the state. Sloganeering which doesn’t provoke violence is justified by law in all manner and forms. The ‘Aazadi’ slogans which India cries out day and night are not seditious as it isn’t provoking any individual to commit acts of violence. However, the CM of UP seems to think otherwise and wishes to charge each one of sedition even when the law doesn’t say so. This is nothing less than abuse of power even after the ‘inactive’ SC finally came down on the government on the same.

Various democracies around the world, including the world’s oldest democracy, the USA, have either repealed completely or softened the laws on sedition. The British, who introduced sedition to oppress Indians, have themselves abolished the law in their country. So why shouldn’t India abolish this legislation which is not viewed rightly in other democracies around the world.

Editor’s Note: “Bhookmari se- azadi. Jaatwad se- azadi. Meri behna mange- azadi. Meri bachi mange- azadi. Naari ka nara- azadi”

If you also have something to write about or speak about, do it now. We encourage our audience to be the ‘voice of change’.

Write to us and send recordings at- democraticcharkha@gmail.com