'Situation From Kashmir To Kerala..': Law Commission Chief On Sedition Law
Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi said that the Law Commission has not made any recommendation for enhancement of punishment "as such".
New Delhi: The Law Commission of India headed by Retd Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi said on Tuesday that Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code, dealing with the law on sedition, is an important tool to safeguard the "safety and integrity of India" given the situation in many parts of the country, from Kashmir to Kerala and Punjab to the North-East.
His comments came at a time when the colonial-era law is under abeyance following directions of the Supreme Court issued in May last year.
Defending the panel's recommendation to retain the law, he said that enough safeguards have been proposed to prevent its misuse.
While speaking to the news agency PTI, Justice Awasthi said that special laws such as the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and the National Security Act operate in different fields and do not cover the offence of sedition and therefore, the specific law on sedition needed to be there too.
He asserted that regarding the law on sedition, the panel found that "the present situation right from Kashmir to Kerala and Punjab to the North-East is such that the law on sedition is necessary to safeguard the unity and integrity of India".
He further stated that the sedition law being a colonial legacy was not a valid ground for its repeal and several countries, including the US, Canada, Australia, and Germany, have their own such laws.
The panel in its report submitted to the government last month supported retaining section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) with safeguards to prevent its misuse.
The recommendation triggered a political uproar with several opposition parties alleging that it was an attempt to stifle dissent and voices against the ruling party ahead of the Lok Sabha elections next year.
While the government said it will take an "informed and reasoned" decision on the Law Commission report after consulting all stakeholders and that the recommendations were "persuasive" but not binding, the Congress has alleged that the government wants to make the sedition law more "draconian".
Referring to the "procedural safeguards" recommended by the commission, Awasthi told PTI that the preliminary inquiry will be held by a police officer of the rank of inspector or above.
The inquiry will be done within seven days from the occurrence of the incident and the preliminary inquiry report will be submitted to the competent government authority for permission for lodging of FIR in this regard, he added.
"On the basis of the preliminary report, if the competent government authority finds any cogent evidence with regard to commissioning of the offence of sedition, it may grant permission. It is only after the grant of permission that the FIR under Section 124 A of the IPC shall be lodged," he said.
"We have also recommended that the central government may issue guidelines which are to be followed in case of commission of any such offence and the said guidelines may clarify as to under what circumstances the said offence was committed," the former chief justice of the Karnataka High Court said.
He also said that the law panel has not made any recommendation for enhancement of punishment "as such".
According to existing provision of section 124A, punishment can be up to three years imprisonment, with or without fine, which may go up to imprisonment for life, with or without fine.
In order to provide clarity to section 124A, the panel has suggested adding words "with a tendency to incite violence or cause public disorder". It has been borrowed from the judgment of the Constitution bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Singh.
The Kedarnath Singh judgment still holds the field and is the settled proposition of law, he said.
Awasthi said the panel has also suggested adding one explanation defining the expression 'tendency'.
Trending News
Top Headlines
