Until Independence, there were broadly two views on Section 124A: that of the judgements

given by the Federal Court, and that of the judgements passed by the Privy Council (the
highest court of appeal for commonwealth countries, they were abolished in India following
the passing of abolition of privy council jurisdiction act, in 1949). The former asserted that
public disorder or the reasonable anticipation or likelihood of public disorder is the gist of the
offence; the latter said that the speech itself, irrespective of whether or not it leads to an
incident, could be an offence. Taking in account Section 19A (the freedom of speech and
expression) of the constitution, the bench observed in the judgements headnote, If the view
taken by the Federal Court was accepted, section 124A would be constitutional but if the
view of the Privy Council was accepted it would be unconstitutional.
SECTION
124-A
IS
INTRA
VIRES
It was observed in this case that "Government established by law" is the visible symbol of the State. The very
existence of the State will be in jeopardy if the Government established by law is subverted. Hence the
continued existence of the Government established by law is an essential condition of the stability of the State.
That is why 'sedition', as the offence in s. 124A has been characterised, comes under Chapter VI relating to
offences against the State. Hence any acts within the meaning of s.124A which have the effect of subverting the
Government by bringing that Government into contempt or hatred, or creating disaffection against it, would be
within the penal statute because the feeling of disloyalty to the Government established by law or enmity to it
imports the idea of tendency to public disorder by the use of actual violence or incitement to violence. This
section does not violate the fundamental right of freedom of speech only imposes a reasonable restriction.

Restrictions on the freedom of expression can be justified if they are provided by

law or if they are in pursuance of a legitimate aim in international treaties such
as the protection of national security, public order, public health or morals. There
needs to be a necessity to restrict the right in the form of a pressing social need
and there needs to be a strict scrutiny regarding the justification of the
restriction. What needs to be seen is not just the necessity of the law that seeks
to restrict the freedom but also the individual measures taken by the State.
When a law restricts freedom of expression by reference to national

furthur amended to expand the scope of the law and bring within its ambit the power to
supress anti-governmental views and opinions by incorporating the terms "hatred" and
"contempt" alongside disaffection.

- amendment to include libel and punishable

- Gandhi and Tilak trial
-Incorp. in IPC
-No amendments yet

In the 19th and early 20th centuries the sedition offense was used primarily to suppress the
writings and speeches of prominent Indian nationalists and freedom fighters. The first known
instance of the application of the lawwas the trial of newspaper editor Jogendra Chandra
Bose in 1891. More prominent examples include the trials of Indian nationalists Bal
Gangadhar Tilak and Mahatma Gandhi.

The leaders of these new movements draw great inspiration from the likes of Gandhi, who
once famously remarked "Section 124A under which I am happily charged is perhaps the
prince among the political sections of the IPC designed to suppress the liberty of the citizen".
Its perhaps these views that instill a sense of 'national pride' in such open opposition. Being a
country born out of an independence movement against British Colonialism, one would
expect that there would be a stronger prefernce for nationalist sentiments. It would appear
that nationalism is a very potent to concept, that the people of our country are afraid of.

HISTORY
-trial of gandhi
-Nehru's dissent
-mACAULAY
CASES
-Kanhaiya Kumar
-2001 - Afzal Guru(symbolism of dates)...lack of direct evidence...circumstantial
evidence
-2011 trial
PRESS COVERAGE
-loves unrest
-Congress bias...far reaching connection
-affect "make in India"...1 week..Maharashtra
-Bihar elections
STRONG CENTRE
-need
-British rule

-comparative analysis