Saturday, November 16, 2024
spot_img

Centre defends sedition law in SC

Date:

Share post:

spot_img
spot_img

New Delhi, May 7: The Centre on Saturday defended in the Supreme Court the penal law on sedition and the 1962 verdict of a constitution bench upholding its validity, saying they have withstood “the test of time” about six decades and the instances of its abuse would never be a justification of reconsideration.
A bench of three judges comprising Chief Justice NV Ramana and Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli, on May 5, said that it would hear arguments on May 10 on the legal question of whether the pleas challenging the colonial-era penal law on sedition be referred to a larger bench for reconsidering the 1962 verdict of a five-judge constitution bench in the Kedar Nath Singh case.
“Instances of the abuse of provision would never be a justification to reconsider a binding judgment of the constitution bench. The remedy would lie in preventing such abuse on a case-to-case basis rather than doubting a long-standing settled law declared by a constitution bench for about six decades,” said the 38-page written submission filed through Solicitor General Tushar Mehta.
The reply also raised the issue of corum and opposed the submissions of senior advocate Kapil Sibal that in a changed fact situation a bench of three judges can also test the validity of the sedition law, saying “no reference, therefore, would be necessary nor can the three-judge bench once again examine the constitutional validity of the very same provision”. The top court, in 1962, had upheld the validity of the sedition law while attempting to restrict its scope for misuse.
It had held that unless accompanied by incitement or a call for violence, the criticism of the government cannot be construed as a seditious offence.
The Centre’s view incidentally matched with the submissions of Attorney General KK Venugopal, who on Thursday had strongly batted for the retention of the provision in the IPC, saying “referring the Kedar Nath (judgement) to a larger bench is not necessary. It is a well-considered judgement.”
Sibal, appearing as the lead counsel on behalf of the petitioners, had said that a three-judge bench can still go into the issue ignoring the 1962 judgement of the five-judge bench in the light of subsequent developments in the fundamental rights jurisprudence.
The bench, on April 27, had directed the central government to file a reply saying it would commence the final hearing in the matter on May 5 and would not entertain any request for adjournment. (PTI)

spot_img
spot_img

Related articles

NEHU VC goes on leave

Senior-most professor Nirmalendu Saha takes over as VC in-charge By Our Reporter SHILLONG, Nov 15: Senior-most professor Nirmalendu Saha on...

Students to continue hunger strike

By Our Reporter SHILLONG, Nov 15: The NEHUSU and KSU NEHU Unit have decided to continue with their indefinite...

NPP upbeat, others say close call in Gambegre

By Our Reporter SHILLONG, Nov 15: All political parties, except National People’s Party (NPP), felt the result of the...

CM inaugurates IGP traffic point

By Our Reporter SHILLONG, Nov 15: Chief Minister Conrad K Sangma on Friday inaugurated the redeveloped and beautified IGP...