The batch of petitions challenging the constitutionality of Section 124-A of the Indian Penal Code, interpreting sedition as exciting disaffection towards the government established by law punishable with imprisonment for three years or for life to which fine may be added, came up for hearing before the Supreme Court bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud and J.B. Pardiwala on Monday, May 1.

The bench recorded the submission of the attorney general for India R. Venkataramani that the government’s consultation with stakeholders on examining the provision is in “substantially advanced stage”. The bench then posted the hearing of the case to the second week of August.

As many as 16 petitions were listed today. 

The petitioners’ counsel on Monday referred to the Paragraph 5 of the top court’s interim order on May 11 last year, in which the government’s commitment to examine the provision was recorded thus:

“In view of the above, it is clear that the Union of India agrees with the prima facie opinion expressed by this Court that the rigors of Section 124A of IPC is not in tune with the current social milieu, and was intended for a time when this country was under the colonial regime. In light of the same, the Union of India may reconsider the aforesaid provision of law.”

Petitioners’ counsel expressed their view that the case may have to be referred to a seven-judge bench, because a five-judge bench had upheld the constitutionality of Section 124-A IPC in Kedarnath vs State of Bihar in 1962, and only a bench larger than the strength that can overrule that judgment.

On May 11 last year, a three-judge bench of the then CJI N.V. Ramana and Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli had directed keeping all pending trials, appeals and proceedings with respect to the charge framed under Section 124A of IPC  in abeyance. The bench had, however, permitted adjudication with respect to other Sections, if any, to proceed if the courts are of the opinion that no prejudice would be caused to the accused.

The bench had also permitted the Union of India to issue a directive to the states and Union Territories to prevent any misuse of Section 124A of IPC. During the May 11, 2022 hearing, the three-judge bench had deferred to the government’s plea to await the outcome of its examination of the provision, as part of its effort to decriminalise many colonial-era legal provisions.

However, when the matter came up for hearing again on October 31 last year, the AGI submitted before the court that the “matter is still engaging the attention of relevant authorities”. He, therefore, sought additional time, so that appropriate steps can be taken.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.