Bombay HC Criticises Sedition Charge In Kangana Ranaut Case – free PDF

What has happened?

• The Bombay high court on Tuesday questioned the invoking of sedition charges against actor Kangana Ranaut and her sister Rangoli Chandel.
• A complaint was filed against them for allegedly “trying to create hatred and communal tension” through their social media posts.
• The Bombay High Court Tuesday heard a petition filed by actor Kangana Ranaut and her sister Rangoli,
• Challenging a Bandra magistrate’s court order that had directed Mumbai Police to take cognizance of a complaint against them for alleged hate posts and statements on social and electronic media.
• While perusing the complaint, the bench enquired about the invocation of Section 124A (sedition) in cases and asked if police officers can be made to undergo workshops about its use.

FIR filled against Kangana

• Last month, the Bandra magistrate’s court had directed that an FIR be registered against Ranaut and her sister based on a private complaint by a casting director and fitness trainer.
• They had alleged that the Ranaut sisters had tried to “malign the Constitution” and were “creating divisions between communities and spreading communal hatred” referring to their tweets and interviews given to electronic media.
• Based on the court’s order, an FIR under sections including under Sections 153 A (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race), 295A (deliberate acts hurting religious sentiments) and 124A (sedition), 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code.
• Against this, Ranaut’s lawyer had approached the Bombay High Court, seeking quashing of the FIR.

observation of Bombay High Court

• On Tuesday, the division bench of Justices S S Shinde and M S Karnik while perusing the complaint observed,
• “It has become routine that IPC 124-A (sedition) is added in complaint. For what? Are we treating citizens of the country like this?
• We understand other sections being added but why 124-A?… what if anybody does not fall in line of the government?”
• “Why are police officers invoking Section IPC 124-A? Please conduct workshops for police officers.
• Not in this particular case but for any case.”

section 124A (Sedition) of IPC

• It came into existence in 1870. British used Sedition law to convict and sentence freedom fighters.
• It was first used to prosecute Bal Gangadhar Tilak in 1897.
• It is defined as, “Whoever, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the Government established by law”.
• The punishments to which offenders are liable under the provisions of this code are,
• Imprisonment for life to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added.

Recent cases

• In recent years, the section has been invoked against those booked for participating in protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019.
• Aseem Trivedi, who was charged with insulting India’s national symbols through his cartoons in 2012.
• Misuse of the sedition law has been widely documented in India, despite the Supreme Court’s clear instructions.
• The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that sedition is constituted by written or spoken words which “have the effect of bringing contempt or dissatisfaction or the idea of subverting government by violent means”.
• In Kedar Nath Singh v State of Bihar, the apex court said that if comments, however strongly worded, do not have the tendency to incite violence, cannot be treated as sedition.
• The court also ruled in Balwant Singh v State of Punjab that raising pro-Khalistan slogans cannot amount to sedition,
• As it evoked no response from the other members of the community.
• The Twenty First Law Commission, in a working paper, also noted that criticising the government does not amount to sedition and that “people have a right to express dissent and criticise the government”.
• It said a higher threshold should be set to prosecute people for sedition law.

Q) The authorization for the withdrawal of funds from the- Consolidated Fund of India must come from?

1. The President of India
2. The Parliament of India
3. The Prime. Minister of India
4. The Union Finance, Minister

Latest Burning Issues | Free PDF

Sharing is caring!