Keypoints:
- A PIL was filed by two journalists who said that the provision has violated freedom of speech and expression.
- In less than three months, this is the second time that such a plea has been placed before the court.
On Friday, the Supreme Court had sought Centre’s response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), thus, challenging validity of section 124A of the Indian Penal Code which criminalises sedition. This is the second time in less than three months that such kind of plea has been put forward before the court.
On Friday, a three – judge bench was led by Justices UU Lalit, Indira Banerjee, and KM Joseph who heard the pleas and notice was issued to the Centre. Kishorechandra Wangkhemcha from Manipur and Kanhaiya Lal Shukla from Chhattisgarh were the two journalists who filed the PIL and said that the provision violated the freedom of speech and expression.
Both of them said that they were charged under 124A for raising questions against their respective state governments as well as the Centre. There were cases registered against them for comments and cartoons shared on the social networking website Facebook.
The petition said that there has been frequent misuse, misapplication and abuse of Section 124-A since 1962. They pleaded that it’s abuse on itself may not bear on the law’s validity but it clearly points to its vagueness and uncertainty. Along with this, it also argued that there has been exertion from the section for unacceptable chilling effect on democratic freedoms.
The plea said that sedition as a crime has been repealed in other post-colonial democracies, condemned as undemocratic, undesirable, and unnecessary.
Previously, in less than three months, the Supreme Court had dismissed a similar plea which had challenged the provision.
