The Supreme Court today issued a very powerful statement against the sedition law by calling it a colonial law and questioning the centre about its existence. “The sedition Law is a colonial law. Do we still need the law in our country after 75 years of Independence," Chief Justice NV Ramana questioned the centre.  However, attorney general K Venugopal has presented an argument that it needs to be retained with some amendments in place. 

For the uninitiated, the sedition law  falls under section 124 A of the IPC and came into existence back in 1860 while India was still under the British Raj. Back then, this act was used to suppress the voice of national struggle which included Mahatma Gandhi and Lokmanya Tilak. 

The Supreme Court’s powerful statement questioning why it still exists has drawn a parallel on social media and a lot of people are weighing in with their opinions.

If I may add to this your Lordship...
The question is also who misused the #sedition more; the British or our own elected Governments? https://t.co/nKOptO4lJn

— The DeshBhakt (@TheDeshBhakt) July 15, 2021

Why only #sedition law?

All british era laws should be scrapped

All laws that were made before 1947, should be scrapped

Our police, judiciary, entire criminal justice system is colonial

Let's change it all https://t.co/QtJAWTDe1W

— Kapil Mishra (@KapilMishra_IND) July 15, 2021

Sedition law was meant to suppress freedom movement, used by Britishers to silence Mahatma Gandhi, others.
Is this law still needed after 75 yrs of Independence. SC
Hoping finally this Colonial law misused by GOI will b thrown out.
That will b a Eid or Diwali day!#Sedition

— Rezina Sultana (@RezinaSultana9) July 15, 2021

We don't need to follow any country. We have our own constitution and laws. Your thoughts are sentimental but we have to think about that Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression and sometimes the govt. misuses the #Sedition law.

— Tushar Singh🇮🇳 (@tusharrr20) July 15, 2021

While the law has existed for such a long time, it has come under criticism for curbing free speech, which is a fundamental right. In 1951, the Punjab High Court actually ruled it out as ‘unconstitutional’.  After the government of India appealed to the Supreme Court,  it was ruled out that speeches against the government of the country were in fact not illegal. A lot of 21st century authors have been charged under this law and the names include the likes of Arundhati Roy and Binayak Sen.

© Twitter

The Supreme Court ruled it out as ‘colonial’ and the statement around why we haven’t got rid of it as a country has garnered a lot of support on the internet. This comes in the light of a plea hearing that has been going on, which was filed by former army officer Major-General S G Vombatkere. He had challenged the Constitutional validity of section 124 A (sedition) of the IPC on the grounds that it causes a ‘chilling effect’ on speech of a human. 

While the CJI maintained that the government was not blamed for its misuse, he exclaimed that “If we go see history of charging of this section, the enormous power of this section can be compared to a carpenter being a saw to make an item, who uses it to cut the entire forest instead of a tree. That's the effect of this provision.”

Simply put in layman’s terms, according to Section 124 A of the Indian Penal Code, whoever, by words, either spoken or written, 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 [im­prisonment for life], to which fine may be added, or with impris­onment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added, or with fine. This is also non-bailable. 

View the full article