SC seeks Centre, Attorney General's response on plea challenging sedition law

The Supreme Court has sought a response from the Centre and the Attorney General on a plea challenging the constitutionality of the offence of sedition under Section 124A of the Indian Penal CodeA bench of Justices UU Lalit and Ajay Rastogi was hearing a writ petition filed by two journalists one each from Manipur and Chhattisgarh It had issued notice to the Attorney General on the petition on April 30During the hearing on Monday AG KK Venugopal and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta representing the Centre urged the top court to grant two weeks to file their responses The bench granted them the time and adjourned the matter for further hearing on July 27The main writ petition filed through advocate Tanima Kishore and drawn by advocate Siddharth Seem on behalf of the petitioner journalists Kishorechandra Wangkhemcha and Kanhaiya Lal Shukla argues the impugned section clearly infringes the fundamental right under Article 191a of the Constitution of India which guarantees that all citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expressionThe restriction imposed by the section is an unreasonable one and therefore does not constitute a permissible restriction in terms of Article 192 of the Constitution Hence this petition is filed to humbly pray that Section 124A be declared unconstitutional and void by this Honble Court and be struck out of the Indian Penal Code said the pleaThe petitioners said the vagueness of Section 124A exerts an unacceptable chilling effect on the democratic freedoms of individuals who cant enjoy their legitimate democratic rights and freedom against the backdrop of fear of life imprisonmentCiting the top court decision upholding the validity of the law in 1962 in the case of Kedar Nath Singh v State of Bihar the plea argued that the court may have been correct in its finding nearly sixty years ago but the law which is obsolete in the contemporary scenario no longer passes constitutional muster todayAlso ReadSenari massacre case SC to hear Bihars appeal against acquittal of 14 peopleAs outspoken and responsible journalists they petitioners have been raising questions against their respective state governments as well as the Central government They have been charged with sedition under Section 124A of IPC in various FIRs for comments and cartoons shared by them on the social networking website Facebook added the pleaThe plea contended that the top court in Kedar Naths case did not go far enough in reading down the section Retaining intention and tendency as basis for criminal liability means that these inherently subjective terms can be used and abused to penalise those who have not caused any violence or public disorder it submittedThis story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed agencies Midday accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability trustworthiness reliability and data of the text Midday managementmiddaycom reserves the sole right to alter delete or remove without notice the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever