{"id":105666,"date":"2026-05-29T11:14:48","date_gmt":"2026-05-29T05:44:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/?p=105666"},"modified":"2026-05-29T11:14:48","modified_gmt":"2026-05-29T05:44:48","slug":"consent-and-the-revival-of-sedition","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/consent-and-the-revival-of-sedition\/","title":{"rendered":"Consent and the Revival of Sedition: Understanding the Supreme Court\u2019s Clarification"},"content":{"rendered":"<h2><b>Revival of Sedition Latest News<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">A three-judge Supreme Court Bench headed by CJI Surya Kant clarified that courts may proceed with trials, appeals, and proceedings under Section 124A of the now-repealed Indian Penal Code (IPC) \u2014 the colonial sedition provision \u2014 if the accused raise no objection.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This has partially revived the paused sedition provision for consenting accused persons, triggering significant constitutional and legal debate.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b>Background \u2014 The May 2022 Order and Vombatkere Case<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In May 2022, the Supreme Court ordered all ongoing and future proceedings under Section 124A to be kept in abeyance \u2014 effectively pausing the sedition law across India.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This came in the context of <\/span><b>S.G. Vombatkere vs Union of India<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> \u2014 a group of writ petitions challenging Section 124A as unconstitutional for violating fundamental rights.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The court had expressed its &#8220;hope and expectation&#8221; that the government would not register fresh FIRs or take coercive action under Section 124A while the constitutional challenge remained pending.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Vombatkere petitions remain pending before the Supreme Court \u2014 meaning the constitutional validity of Section 124A has still not been decided.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b>What Triggered the Recent Clarification<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The clarification arose from a Special Leave Petition filed by one Kamran \u2014 anxious about his nearly decade-old appeal against conviction under the UAPA, Arms Act, and IPC including Section 124A.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">He and his co-accused were sentenced to life imprisonment by a Sessions Court in Madhya Pradesh in February 2017.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Their appeal before the State High Court had been stuck in limbo since the May 2022 Supreme Court order. The High Court appeared &#8220;reluctant&#8221; to hear the appeal while the stay was in force.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Kamran submitted that he was willing to let the High Court hear the full appeal \u2014 including the sedition component.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Supreme Court relented and passed a general direction .<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b>Key Constitutional Concerns<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li aria-level=\"1\"><b>Trial Under a Law Whose Validity Is Undecided<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The recent clarification raises a fundamental question: can courts continue trials under a law whose constitutionality is still under judicial scrutiny?<\/span><\/li>\n<li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Since the challenge to Section 124A remains pending before the Supreme Court, lower courts may be required to decide guilt under a provision that could eventually be declared unconstitutional.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li aria-level=\"1\"><b>Violation of Equality Before Law<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The clarification creates a visible disparity in the application of Section 124A. Those who consent \u2014 perhaps out of desperation for closure or confidence in their innocence \u2014 will face trial.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Those who do not consent will wait in indefinite limbo until the Supreme Court finally decides the Vombatkere petitions \u2013 a clear violation of Article 14.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li aria-level=\"1\"><b>Passed Without Hearing Vombatkere Petitioners<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The May 21 direction was passed in the unconnected Kamran case \u2014 without issuing notice to or hearing the petitioners in the Vombatkere group of matters.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This raises serious procedural concerns about the validity of a general direction that effectively modifies the scope of the 2022 order without hearing those directly affected by it.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li aria-level=\"1\"><b>Practical Problems in Co-Accused Scenarios<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The clarification creates practical problems for lower courts \u2014 if one accused consents to be tried under Section 124A while a co-accused does not, the court faces a legally untenable situation with different legal standards applying to different accused in the same case.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b style=\"font-size: inherit;\">Historical and Legislative Context of Sedition<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The offence of sedition has been traced to the <\/span><b>Statute of Westminster 1275<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> \u2014 enacted when the King was considered the holder of Divine right.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Section 124A of the IPC was a colonial tool used to suppress political dissent \u2014 most famously invoked against <\/span><b>Bal Gangadhar Tilak<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> and <\/span><b>Mahatma Gandhi<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Even after Independence, sedition has been viewed with suspicion. PM Nehru described Section 124A on the floor of the Provisional Parliament in 1951 as &#8220;highly objectionable and obnoxious.&#8221;<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><b>Kedar Nath Singh vs State of Bihar (1962)<\/b><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Supreme Court &#8220;read down&#8221; Section 124A \u2014 holding that a citizen has the right to criticise the government in speech or writing, so long as it does not incite violence or create public disorder.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This remains the foundational judicial interpretation of sedition in India.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><b>Documented Misuse<\/b><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Attorney General in 2022 shared glaring instances of misuse \u2014 including the case where an independent MP and her husband were booked under Section 124A for threatening to recite the Hanuman Chalisa outside the private residence of a former Maharashtra Chief Minister.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b>Section 152 BNS \u2014 The Successor Provision Also Under Challenge<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) \u2014 considered the successor to Section 124A \u2014 is itself under challenge in the Supreme Court for its ambiguity and potential chilling effect on free speech.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Critics argue it retains the same essential character as the old sedition law while using different language \u2014 making the fundamental constitutional questions unresolved regardless of which provision is used.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b>The Broader Constitutional Framework \u2014 Fundamental Rights Are Interconnected<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The current challenges to sedition provisions urge the Supreme Court to apply post-Kedar Nath precedents \u2014 including <\/span><b><i>R.C. Cooper, Indira Gandhi vs Raj Narain, and I.R. Coelho<\/i><\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> \u2014 which established that fundamental rights do not reside in isolated silos.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">A charge under Section 124A or Section 152 that curtails free speech also necessarily affects the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Each fundamental right animates the others \u2014 making sedition not just a free speech issue but a comprehensive fundamental rights question.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b>Conclusion<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The real solution lies not in temporary clarifications but in a <\/span><b>final judicial determination on the constitutionality of sedition laws<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Until then, citizens remain caught between prolonged uncertainty and prosecution under a provision whose legality is yet to be settled.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><b>Source:<\/b> <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/epaper.thehindu.com\/reader\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">TH<\/a> | <a href=\"https:\/\/www.thehindu.com\/news\/national\/sc-revival-of-section-124a-proceedings-revives-debate-over-colonial-era-sedition-law\/article71017818.ece\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">TH<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Consent and the Revival of Sedition has reignited debate over free speech, constitutional rights, and the future of sedition-related proceedings in India.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":18,"featured_media":105679,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[18],"tags":[60,7810,22,59],"class_list":{"0":"post-105666","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-upsc-mains-current-affairs","8":"tag-mains-articles","9":"tag-revival-of-sedition","10":"tag-upsc-current-affairs","11":"tag-upsc-mains-current-affairs-tag","12":"no-featured-image-padding"},"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/105666","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/18"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=105666"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/105666\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":105681,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/105666\/revisions\/105681"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/105679"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=105666"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=105666"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=105666"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}