Explained: What is Section 124A brought by the British to silence people like Mahatma Gandhi?

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday put a bar on Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code till the government’s exercise of reviewing the law is complete.

The court came by a bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justices Surya Kant, and Hima Kohli. The bench also ordered the government not to register any such cases in the future before the re-examination is over.

The court also said it will expeditiously dispose the cases registered under Section 124A if any party approaches. ”It would be appropriate to put the provision on abeyance,” added the apex court.

Amid the controversy over the law, let’s understand the sedition law and its history.

Is it a separate act?

Sedition is a part of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in the form of Section 124A. It makes it clear that it is not a separate Act by Parliament. In 1870, Thomas Macaulay drafted Section 124A. He is also known for bringing English education to our country.

The prime objective of the British government to bring the law was to deal with ”increasing Wahabi activities”.

Rajdroh vs Deshdroh

Most of us think sedition is ”deshdroh” or anti-national act. However, it is ”rajdroh” or anti-government act; thus, it cannot be called crime against the country or nation.

When does criticism become sedition?

Sedition is called when someone uses the words or performs any action to provoke people to be or act against a government. However, many courts already said the government should not invoke the sedition law if there is no violence. Critics say the word can be linked to violence anytime by the government.

Punishment

The provision of the law says, ”Whoever, by words, either spoken or written, or by sings, 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 which may extend to three years, to which a fine may be added; or, with fine.”

Government’s stand

The critics of the law say the government use it to suppress free speech and no government since Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru showed interest to annul it.

The opposition party says one can protest, agitate against the government and criticise its policies but it can not be allowed to jeopardise its functioning.