Centre seeks a week more to file response in SC on pleas against sedition law

Supreme Court

The Centre has sought a week's time to file its response on petitions challenging the sedition law, which carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

The top court had scheduled the matter for hearing on Thursday. On April 27, the Supreme Court allowed the Centre to file its response on petitions demanding striking down of the sedition law, by the end of the week.

After seeking one day's time on Sunday, the Centre filed another application seeking an additional week's time to file its response on the petitions. In its fresh application, it said the response awaited the approval from the competent authority.

Last week, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, submitted before a bench headed by Chief Justice N.V. Ramana that the reply on the petitions is almost ready and sought two days to finalise, and then it will be filed in the court.

The bench, also comprising Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli, recorded that Centre will file the reply by end of this week and listed the matter for final disposal on May 5.

Attorney General K.K. Venugopal also appeared, since the court had issued notice to him, and said he will assist the court in the matter. The Chief Justice said no adjournment will be granted in the matter. The matter was last heard in July last year.

The top court was hearing petitions filed by Maj Gen S.G. Vombatkere (retd) and the Editors Guild of India and others, challenging the constitutional validity of Section 124A which carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

Vombatkere's plea argued that a statute criminalising expression based on unconstitutionally vague definitions of 'disaffection towards government' etc. is an unreasonable restriction on the fundamental right to free expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) and causes constitutionally impermissible 'chilling effect' on the speech.

In July, last year, the top court had questioned the Centre on the utility of having a sedition law even after 75 years of gaining independence from the British, and also frowned on the misuse of law by the police against people.

Then, a bench headed by Chief Justice Ramana said: "It is a colonial law used by the British to silence Mahatma Gandhi, (Bal Gangadhar) Tilak. Still, is it necessary after 75 years of independence?"

"I am indicating what I am thinking," the Chief Justice told Venugopal

Citing the example of continued usage of Section 66A of IT Act, which was quashed, but abused to arrest thousands for airing their views, the top court pointed out that sedition law (Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code) is also not immune to misuse by police to fix persons who speak against the government.

"It is like you give a saw to a carpenter and he will cut the entire forest. This is the impact of this law," the Chief Justice said.

The AG replied that he completely understands the concern of the top court and submitted that the court can lay down fresh guidelines to restrict the use of the sedition provision only for protection of nation and democratic institutions, instead of taking out the entire law. The Chief Justice said the situation on the ground is grave, and if one party does not like what the other is saying, Section 124A is used.

This story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed, agencies. Mid-day accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability, trustworthiness, reliability and data of the text. Mid-day management/mid-day.com reserves the sole right to alter, delete or remove (without notice) the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever