RECENT TREND RELATING TO SEDITION LAW IN INDIA ISSUES AND CHALLENGES

This paper provides a detailed analysis of contemporary issues surrounding sedition law in India, with a focus on Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code. It traces the historical evolution of sedition law from its colonial origins to its application in democratic India. The study highlights the broad and ambiguous language of Section 124A, which criminalizes acts aimed at stirring disaffection towards the government and examines inconsistent judicial interpretations and potential misuse.

Drawing on landmark cases such as Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962 AIR 955) and recent rulings like Vinod Dua v. Union of India (2021), the paper evaluates the judiciary’s role in defining sedition and protecting constitutional rights. It discusses the Supreme Court’s efforts to balance national security concerns with freedom of speech, emphasizing the requirement of direct incitement to violence or public disorder for sedition charges.

Comparative analysis with sedition laws in democracies like the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia offers insights into global trends of narrowing or abolishing such laws to uphold democratic freedoms. This comparison underscores the need for India to reconsider the expansive scope of its sedition law and align it with international human rights standards.

Proposed reforms include procedural safeguards such as mandatory judicial review before filing sedition charges to prevent arbitrary or politically motivated prosecutions. The paper also recommends enhancing police training and establishing independent oversight mechanisms to ensure fair application of sedition law.

Lastly, the paper emphasizes the need for judicial reforms, including clear guidelines from the Supreme Court to standardize the interpretation of sedition law across lower courts. It proposes alternative dispute resolution mechanisms to resolve sedition cases less adversarially and reduce societal impacts on accused individuals.