Sedition law misuse largely been controlled: Attorney General

Misuse of the sedition law has 'largely been controlled' barring a recent incident when it was invoked against those reciting Hanuman Chalisa, Attorney General KK Venugopal contended in the Supreme Court on Thursday to bolster his argument that the imperial-era law should be allowed to remain in the statute book.

SC had earlier held Section 124A, IPC, was constitutionally valid in the Kedarnath case in 1962. But given its misuse in recent years, activists, political leaders and dissidents have all urged the court to have a re-look at the 1962 ruling and strike down the provision in the Indian Penal Code to prevent its large-scale misuse.

Venugopal's response in his capacity as AG came to a court notice to explain his stand on the legality of Section 124A. "The court needs to lay down guidelines on what is permissible and what is not. See what is happening in the country. Yesterday sedition was invoked against some who recited the Hanuman Chalisa. Otherwise, misuse of the law has been largely controlled."


'Independent' MP Navneet Rana and his wife were charged with sedition recently for chanting Hanuman Chalisa outside the Maharashtra CM's residence. They have since been released on bail.

The AG argued that the law laid down in the Kedarnath case was good and the court should not overturn it. The 1962 ruling clearly said that criticising the government of the day would not attract sedition. Only activities which create public disorder or incite violence will. The Centre, however, despite receiving a notice has not put across its views on the subject yet.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who represented the Centre, sought yet another adjournment promising to come back with a clear stand in the next few days. The bench led by CJI NV Ramana had at first declared its intention to go ahead with the hearing without waiting for the Centre's response, but eventually granted more time to the government.