The Bombay High Court on Monday observed that there was need for safeguards to the Section on sedition in the Indian Penal Code as the state could easily misuse it. Referring to the arrest of two girl students in Palghar in 2012 over their comments on Facebook, the court said there could be many situations where slapping such charges would never be justifiable.
Giving a hypothetical situation of people not paying toll, the court asked if the state would then slap sedition charges against the protesters. “People don’t like paying toll tax. If they don’t pay toll, that is construed as dissatisfaction. If there is violence and creation of dissatisfaction then, you can say it is Section 124A?” The state, represented by Advocate-General Sunil Manohar, said such a protest would be against the policies of the state and not against the state itself.
“It [sedition charge] can be misused any time. We are not saying that the power should not be there. But there should be safeguards,” Chief Justice Mohit Shah said. A Division Bench headed by the Chief Justice was hearing a public interest litigation petition against the arrest of cartoonist Aseem Trivedi in 2012. The Kanpur-based cartoonist was arrested on charges of sedition by the Mumbai police after he caricatured national emblems and Parliament. After a huge public outcry, the state withdrew the charges.
The court said such sections should not scare away people in a democracy from exercising their right to freedom of expression and speech. “If adequate safeguards are not provided, it may lead to people not expressing themselves at all. Freedom of speech should not suffer due to fear,” Justice N.M. Jamdar said.
Justice Shah observed that in such conditions, people might prefer not to express themselves, instead of going through the hassles of arrest, FIR, bail application.
The State government has submitted draft guidelines to the court regarding invoking Section 124A of the IPC. “We will implement them depending on the court order in the matter,” Mr. Manohar said.
“Not absolutely innocent”“The cartoonist [Aseem Trivedi] ran perilously close to borderline. He is not absolutely innocent. It is not the case that the state vindictively slapped charges on him,” the Advocate-General said, adding that the state acted only after a dozen complaints.
He submitted that there were enough safeguards against the misuse of the sedition section. “No data has been produced to show that the police have misused the power. The petitioner has not given data that the Government of Maharashtra has been rampantly applying sedition charge,” he said.
Petitioner’s lawyer Mihir Desai argued for prior legal opinion before such arrests were made. He said the investigating officer should seek the permission of a senior officer.
The court reserved its judgment.
