JNU sedition charge untenable: Experts

Aditi Tandon

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, February 12

On a day of intense political bickering between the BJP and the Left over JNU Student Union president Kanhaiya Kumar’s arrest for sedition, top legal experts said the case itself was “legally stupid and foolish” and “would never stand the scrutiny of law”.

Experts based their contention on the interpretation of Section 124-A of IPC (sedition) by the Constitution Bench of Supreme Court in 1962 in the famous “Kedarnath versus State of Bihar” judgment.

“It for the first time explained what constituted an offence of sedition. It said the offence would be made out only if something said against the state is also coupled with a violent act to overthrow it. In the JNU case, it is legally stupid and foolish on the part of Delhi Police to file an FIR for sedition. Even if anti-India slogans were raised, nothing was done later to overthrow the state. For instance, if someone says Nathuram Godse is a saint, he may offend national sentiment but can’t be booked for sedition,” senior Supreme Court lawyer Colin Gonsalves said. He recalled two specific cases where the apex court had rejected the state’s charges of sedition — one involved a Sikh who raised “Khalistan zindabad” slogans and another a Muslim who said arms should be distributed to fight the Indian state.

More recently, the Supreme Court had refused to accept charges of sedition against Binayak Sen, whom Chhattisgarh police had arrested in 2007. The court granted him bail in April 2011 saying no sedition was proved. Even in the case of Hardik Patel, charged with sedition by Surat police for saying “kill four, five policemen”, the apex court this January allowed the Gujarat government to file a chargesheet but added that it would see if a case of sedition is made out.

PDT Achary, former top law officer of the Lok Sabha, argues that sedition is unconstitutional. “Even the original IPC draft of 1861 didn’t have this Section. It was an afterthought by the colonial rulers to crush Indian subjects. In a democracy, sedition has no place.”

Asked if the Delhi Police action was right, Congress leader and lawyer Abhiskeh Singhvi said, “Sedition is a very harsh Section. Mere speech doesn’t constitute sedition. Speech should be followed by action. Hope Delhi Police knows what sedition means in the eyes of the law. If anything seditious is thus proved, the law should take its course.”