New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday gave the state its position on a batch of petitions challenging the colonial-era sedition law – Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code – that has been repeatedly invoked to curb dissent. The final hearing on the matter was posted on May 5, making it clear that no request for adjournment will be entertained.
A bench comprising Chief Justice NV Ramana, and including Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli, the file to the Center in the allotted time
Tushar Mehta, solicitor-general after the weekend, for appearing
Center, sought two days to file a reply. Mr Mehta told the court the central government’s affidavit was ready, but some changes were made and required within two days of filing.
The court in its order said: “The Solicitor-General sought two days to file the reply. We direct the center to file a reply by the end of the week. The reply (by petitioners) to that (Center’s) affidavit to be filed by Tuesday. May 5 on any adjournment without final disposal for List the matter. ”
The bench said: “We will have a hearing on May 5. We will have full
day hearings. ”
Earlier, on July 15, 2021, the court had issued a notice to the Center on Plea by Maj. Gen. SG Vombatkere (Retd), journalists Patricia Mukhim and Kashmir Times Editor Anuradha Bhasin, and the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), challenge the constitutional validity of sedition law. Section 124A of the IPC has also been challenged by others.
Seeing the assistance of Attorney-General KK Venugopal at the last hearing on July 15, 2021, Chief Justice NV Ramana, Heading a Bench that Comprised Justices AS Bopanna and Hrishikesh Roy Mahatma Gandhi, Bal Gangadhar Tilak and others.
CJI Ramana had a poser asked: “Is this law still required after 75 years of independence?” He asked the AG: “Our concern is the law of misuse and the lack of accountability. Why Does It Continue After 75 Years of Our Independence? ”
Chief Justice Ramana said the people were “scared” over the sedition law being invoked against them by the government. The law of widespread misuse over the voiced concern, saying: “The situation is the ground of grave … If one party does not like what the other is saying, Section 124A is used … It is a serious threat. functioning of individuals and parties. ”
CJI Ramana had further said: “If a police officer wants to fix something in a village, he can use Section 124A … People are scared.”
The Narendra Modi government was involved in repealing archaic and obsolete laws when the court heard the case, and why the sedition law was still retained. The CJI told Mr Venugopal: “Your government has repealed many stale lawsuits. Section 124A of the IPC? ”
Sensing the Mood of the Court, Mr Venugopal says that instead of striking down the law, the Court may frame guidelines so that Section 124A IPC meets its legal purpose.
