KEDAR NATH VS STATE OF BIHAR, THE LANDMARK RULING
In the landmark 1962 Kedar Nath Singh case, the Supreme Court of India upheld the constitutional validity of sedition law. The court observed that unless there is an incitement or call for violence, criticism of the government cannot be labeled sedition.
Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code takes about sedition, it states “WHOEVER, BY WORDS, EITHER SPOKEN OR WRRITTEN, 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 IN INDIA, SHALL BE PUNISHED WITH IMPRISIONMENT FOR LIFE, TO WHICH FINE MAY BE ADDED, OR WITH IMPRISIONMENT WHICH MAY EXTEND TO THREE YEARS, TO WHICH FINE MAYBE ADDED, R WITH FINE.”
Let’s take a look at the background of the sedition law under section 124A of the IPC.
Indian Penal Code was drafted in the year 1860, although Sedition was not a part of the IPC drafted in 1860. It was added to the IPC in the year 1870 during the WAHABI movement. The Indian freedom fighters wanted to propagate the idea that India was under illegal British occupation. To spread the propaganda, people decided to spread their ideas through speeches and writings. Britishers felt that this feeling of nationalism would soon kick them out of the subcontinent and hence laws were required to suppress the movement started by various leaders.
Bal Ganga Dhar Tilak became the first Indian to be booked under section 124A.
Later, Mahatama Gandhi was also booked under the same law for his articles in Young India.
Mahatma Gandhi called section 124A as the prince among the political sections of IPC designed to suppress the liberty of the citizens
The UTTAR PRADESH High court in the verdict of RAM NANDAN VS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH declared section 124A as ultra virus.
BACKGROUND OF KEDAR NATH SINGH VS STATE OF BIHAR
Kedar nath was a member of Forward communist party, Bihar. He had used the term “DOGS” for CID officers and GOONDAS for leaders of Indian National Congress. He went on saying that he believe in revolution, which will come and in the flames of which the capitalists, zamindars and the Congress leaders of India, who have made it their profession to loot the country, will be reduced to ashes and on their ashes will be established a Government of the poor and the downtrodden people of India.
Section 124A was charged against him, he was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of 1 year.
The matter went to the Supreme Court and issue of constitutional validity of section 124A was referred to a constitutional bench. Kedar Nath argued that IPC under section 124A violated the right to freedom of expression under article 19 of the Indian Constitution.
The Supreme Court upheld the validity of section 124A and at the same time, limited its application to acts that involve intention or tendency to create disorder or incitement to violence. Strongly worded remarks, as long as they do not excite disloyalty and enmity, or incite violence, is not an offence under section 124A. The Supreme Court in its ruling said sedition charges could not be invoked against a citizen for criticism of government actions as it would violate the freedom of speech and expression.
