January 22, 2026

Section 124A Of The IPC Must Go

By Our Editorial Team
First publised on 2022-11-03 07:24:40

About the Author

The India Commentary view

View all posts by this Author

The Centre has once again asked the Supreme Court "not to invest time in examining the validity of Section 124A once again and be pleased to await the exercise of reconsideration to be undertaken by the Government of India before an appropriate forum where such reconsideration is constitutionally permitted". But in its short affidavit, while stressing that Prime Minister Modi has repeatedly "expressed his unequivocal views in favour of protection of civil liberties, respect of human rights, and giving meaning to the constitutionally cherished freedoms by the people of the country", it goes on to say that in view of the divergence of views on the matter, the government has "decided to re-examine and reconsider the provisions of Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code which can only be done before the competent forum".

This clearly shows the government is not thinking of scrapping the law but is only thinking of further tinkering. That will not do. The archaic law introduced by the British to subjugate freedom fighters is now being used to muzzle the voice of the critics of the government. It needs to be totally scrapped. There are other laws that can be, and are, used for the genuine purpose of moving against people who incite or give a call for violence. The Supreme Court has already stayed the registration of fresh FIRs, ongoing probes and coercive measures under the sedition law earlier this year.

The government had, earlier, asked the Supreme Court to create barriers against the misuse of Section 124A. But as is evident from the Kedar Nath judgment which tried to do just that, barriers do not work. In the Kedar Nath judgment, the court had expressly prohibited the use of the section if the criticism of government was not accompanied with incitement or call to violence. Since that is a grey area, the section continues to be misused with impunity. That it is being used as a tool of harassment is proved by the fact that the prosecution has managed to get convictions in only 3% cases so far.

Hence, the draconian sedition law which gives the police the power to arrest the accused without a warrant and which is now being used to muzzle criticism of the government despite the explanations to the section clearly stating that comments that seek alteration of government policy by lawful means or comments that do not cause hatred, contempt or dissatisfaction cannot attract the charge of sedition, needs to be scrapped.