Sedition,defamation charges cannot be invoked for criticism:SC

New Delhi, Sep 5 (PTI) Sedition or defamation casescannot be slapped on anyone criticising the government, theSupreme Court today said in a clear message. "Someone making a statement to criticise the governmentdoes not invoke an offence under sedition or defamation law.We have made it clear that invoking of section 124(A) of IPC(sedition) requires certain guidelines to be followed as perthe earlier judgement of the apex court," a bench of JusticesDipak Misra and U U Lalit said while refraining from sayinganything further on the issue. The observation came as Advocate Prashant Bhushan,appearing for an NGO, said sedition was a serious offence andthe law on it was being grossly misused for stifling dissent. He cited the examples of sedition charges being slappedon agitators protesting against Kudankulam Nuclear PowerProject and cartoonist Aseem Trivedi, among others. To this, the bench said "we don’t have to explain thesedition law. It’s already there in the five-judgesconstitution bench judgement in Kedar Nath Singh vs state ofBihar of 1962." The court, while disposing of a petition filed by NGOCommon Cause alleging misuse of the sedition law, refused topass a direction on the plea that a copy of this order be sentto all Chief Secretaries of states and the Directors Generalof Police. "You have to file separate plea highlighting if anymisuse of sedition law is there. In criminal jurisprudence,allegations and cognisance have to be case specific, otherwiseit will go haywire. There can’t be any generalisation," thebench said. Bhushan said law has not been amended after the KedarNath Singh judgement by the apex court and a constable doesnot understand the judgement but what he understands is thesection in the IPC. "Constables don’t need to understand. It is themagistrate who needs to understand and follow the guidelinesas laid down by the apex court while invoking seditioncharges," the apex court said. The court was hearing a plea seeking the apex court’sintervention to address the "misuse" of section 124 A of theIPC contending that such a charge was being framed with a viewto "instill fear and scuttle dissent". (More) PTI MNL PKS SJKRKSARC