📜 Evolution of Sedition Law in India (1857–2025)
🧭 1. Historical Background
🔹 1857: First War of Independence
- British faced massive rebellion and began systematically strengthening legal and administrative control.
- Result: Need for codified criminal law to suppress future uprisings.
🔹 1860: Indian Penal Code (IPC) enacted
- Drafted by Lord Macaulay, IPC was implemented in 1860.
- Interestingly, Sedition (124A) was not included initially.
🧨 2. Insertion of Section 124A – Sedition
🔹 Year: 1870
🔹 Drafted by: James Fitzjames Stephen
🔹 Purpose:
To curb growing nationalist sentiments and press criticism after 1857 revolt and especially after the rise of Indian newspapers and political speeches.
Definition (Original):
Whoever by words, signs or visible representation brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites disaffection toward the government established by law in British India.
🔹 Punishment: Life imprisonment or 3 years + fine
🧑⚖️ 3. British Era Cases
✅ Queen-Empress v. Bal Gangadhar Tilak (1897 & 1908)
- Charged for articles in Kesari newspaper.
- Court said: “Disaffection” includes disloyalty and all bad feelings toward the government.
- Led to widening the scope of 124A.
✅ Niharendu Dutt Majumdar v. King Emperor (1942)
- Calcutta HC held: Sedition must involve incitement to violence.
- BUT: Privy Council reversed this, reaffirming mere criticism is sedition.
🧪 4. Post-Independence Retention
Even after independence, India retained Section 124A in IPC. It was challenged multiple times for being anti-democratic.
⚖️ 5. Landmark Case – Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962)
🧑⚖️ Context:
- Kedar Nath, a Communist leader, criticized the government.
- Charged under Section 124A.
🧠 Supreme Court Verdict:
- Upheld constitutional validity of 124A, but: Interpreted it narrowly:
Only applicable when there is incitement to violence or public disorder.
🔹 Criticism of the government is NOT sedition
🔹 Law must pass the test of “clear and present danger”
✅ This interpretation “saved” sedition law under Article 19(2) – reasonable restriction on free speech.
⚠️ 6. Later Developments and Misuse
Over the decades, Section 124A was used against:
- Students (e.g., Kanhaiya Kumar, Umar Khalid)
- Journalists
- Activists (e.g., Arundhati Roy)
- Cartoonists (e.g., Aseem Trivedi)
- Farmers and protestors
✅ 1. Direct Link with Article 19(1)(a) – Freedom of Speech and Expression
Article 19(1)(a): Guarantees freedom of speech and expression to all citizens.
🆚 But…
Article 19(2): Allows reasonable restrictions on this freedom in the interest of:
- Sovereignty and integrity of India
- Security of the State
- Public order
- Decency or morality
- Contempt of court, Defamation, Incitement to offence
⚖️ Where Does Sedition Fit?
| Law | Claimed Basis for Restriction |
|---|---|
| IPC 124A (Sedition) | Public order, Security of the State, Sovereignty and Integrity (as per Article 19(2)) |
| BNS Section 150–152 | Expanded to include unity and integrity, electronic/financial means |
🔍 Supreme Court Interpretation (Kedar Nath Singh, 1962):
- Sedition law is constitutional only when it aligns with Article 19(2).
- Hence, incitement to violence or public disorder = valid restriction.
- Mere criticism or dissent ≠ Sedition
🔹 Notable Judgments:
| Year | Case | Verdict |
|---|---|---|
| 1995 | Balwant Singh v. State of Punjab | Mere slogan shouting “Khalistan Zindabad” without public disorder = NOT sedition |
| 2015 | Shreya Singhal v. Union of India | Struck down Section 66A IT Act; emphasized importance of free speech |
| 2016 | Common Cause v. Union of India | SC cautioned against misuse; ordered guidelines |
| 2021 | Vinod Dua v. Union of India | Criticism of govt. policies ≠ sedition |
🛑 7. Supreme Court Pauses 124A (2022)
🔹 Context:
- Petitions challenged 124A as unconstitutional and colonial.
- SC in May 2022 paused all sedition trials and allowed re-examination by the Centre.
“Sedition law is not in tune with the current democratic ethos of India.”
✅ No new FIRs or arrests under 124A unless examined by competent authority.
🏛️ 8. Repeal under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023
📅 Enacted: December 2023
📅 Effective from: 1 July 2024
📕 BNS Replaces IPC
🔁 Section 124A IPC repealed, but similar offence introduced:
🔹 Section 150, 151, 152 of BNS (depends on final numbering)
- Punishes acts that:
- Excite secession
- Promote armed rebellion or subversive activities
- Encourage separatist slogans
- Disrupt sovereignty, unity or integrity of India
🧠 Adds:
- Use of electronic communication
- Use of financial means to support rebellion
✅ Still allows criticism of government if done lawfully (Explanation clause retained)
🔍 Comparison: IPC 124A vs. BNS Section 150/152
| Feature | IPC 124A | BNS 2023 |
|---|---|---|
| Term used | “Sedition” | “Acts endangering sovereignty, unity & integrity” |
| Criticism allowed? | Yes (Kedar Nath) | Yes (Explanation clause) |
| Medium | Words/signs | Includes digital + financial |
| Punishment | Up to life | Life or up to 7 years |
| Judicial review | Yes (1962) | Awaiting fresh review post-enactment |
🎯 UPSC Relevance
✅ Prelims
- First case: Bal Gangadhar Tilak
- Kedar Nath: 1962
- Repealed: 2023 (BNS)
- Came into effect: July 1, 2024
✅ Mains
Q: Do you agree with the substitution of sedition law under BNS 2023? Evaluate its democratic compatibility.
Keywords to use:
- Chilling effect
- Constitutional morality
- Doctrine of proportionality
- Free speech vs. national security
- Clear and present danger test
📌 Conclusion
From colonial repression to constitutional redefinition and now democratic reform, the journey of sedition law reflects India’s struggle to balance state integrity with individual liberty.
“A state that fears dissent, fears democracy itself.”