Charges of sedition “cannot be invoked to quieten the disquiet under the pretence of muzzling the miscreants”, a Delhi Court observed while granting bail to a 21-year-old labourer on Tuesday. The youth has been arrested for posting a fake video on his Facebook page about the Delhi police over the ongiong farmers’ agitation.
Additional Sessions Judge Dharmender Rana remarked that in the absence of any exhortation, call, incitement or instigation to create disorder or disturbance of public peace by resort to violence, the sedition law cannot be invoked against anyone.
Mr. Swaroop Ram had posted a fake video on his Facebook page with the tagline 'Delhi Police mae bagawat 200 policekarmiyon ne diya samuhik istifa . (There is a rebellion in Delhi Police and around 200 police officials have resigned en masse) Jai Jawaan Jai Kisan #I_Support_ Rakesh_ Tikait_ Challenge.”
Also read:Government silencing journalists reporting truth on farmers’ protests, alleges Congress
Delhi police stated that the posted video was related to an incident in which a senior officer of Delhi Police was briefing police personnel at the protest site and also encouraging them to tackle the situation properly.
The public prosecutor submitted that Mr Ram has not only made a sensational Facebook post with an intent to spread disaffection against the State but has also committed forgery. The public prosecutor said the offence committed attracted charges under sedition, forgery and of spreading rumours.
Mr Ram, in his defence, submitted that material alleged against him was “innocuous in nature and it is in fact an expression of emotions uttered in disagreement with government policies”.
Also read:Govt. draws flak for ‘adversarial’ stance on farmers’ protests
Taking note of submission from both sides, Additional Sessions Judge Rana said, “The law of sedition is a powerful tool in the hands of the State to maintain peace and order in the society. However, it cannot be invoked to quieten the disquiet under the pretence of muzzling the miscreants”.
“I have personally seen the video in the court room wherein evidently a senior police officer of Delhi Police is raising slogans, in a very agitated tone, and a group of Delhi Police personnel are seen standing besides him,” the judge said.
“The background voices also suggests a very charged up atmosphere. It was informed by the IO (investigating officer) that the applicant (Mr Ram) is not the author of the said post and he has merely forwarded it,” the court added.
“In the absence of any exhortation, call, incitement or instigation to create disorder or disturbance of public peace by resort to violence or any allusion or oblique remark or even any hint towards this objective, attributable to the applicant accused, I suspect that Section 124 A IPC (sedition) can be validly invoked against the applicant,” the court said.
The court also questioned the Delhi police how it added offence of forgery in the present case “unless there is some false document”.
