LEGALPEDIA JOURNAL LegalPedia Journal Volume1 Issue1 ISSN No. 2581-7949 www.legalpediajournal.com October 18 Message from Editor-in-chief Desk It gives me immense pleasure to introduce and present the very first issue of the LegalPedia Journal, an edition which covers the contemporary issue around the country. The literacy work presented in this issue provides the various lenses through which the readers can see the society and understand how law is connected with the society as well as relation between the both. The edition addresses the hot topics revolving around the country like Sedition law, Right of Women to worship, Women Empowerment, Status of Acid Attack in SAARC Nations and many more. Thus, this edition will help to clear the clouds around the notion. I am thankful to all the students and professionals for contributing their manuscript for this very first issue. I am sure that our journal will provide top-quality original papers and articles, case reports, essay that will continue to help everyone interested in the field of law. I, again, hope that the journal will continue to be an important conduit for legal research and information on a very broad national and international level. I would also like to extent my gratitude to all members of Editorial board as well as Advisory team for investing their time and support towards this journal. Prof. (Dr.) B.R.Saini Editor-in-Chief LegalPedia Journal INDEX S. NO. PARTICULARS PAGE NO. 1. Role of supreme court on sedition law: 1 – 13 An Analysis 2. Changed legal scenario of Sexual 14 – 25 Offences 3. Acid Attack product of 2013 26 – 39 Amendment: A critical study and observation in SAARC countries 4. Gender Equality: access to Worship 40 – 49 Places 5. Empowerment of women under Indian 50 – 58 Constitution 6. Abetment and Criminal Conspiracy: an 59 – 71 Analysis LEGALPEDIA JOURNAL VOLUME 1 ISSUE 1 LEGALPEDIA JOURNAL VOLUME 1 ISSUE 1 ISSN No. 2581-7949 ROLE OF SUPREME COURT ON SEDITION LAW: AN ROLE OF SUPREME COURT ON SEDITION LAW : ANALYSIS AN ANALYSIS -By Nishant Mittal1 Abstract 1 Nishant Mittal ABLaw Sof STRACTedition is as old as the history of civilization, an era in which the concept of patriotism evolved. The word "sedition" comes straight out of the Latin word -- "sed" means apart and La“wition of meSeditionans going is" asi.e. oldgoin asg a ptheart. hisSedittoionry rofefe civilizrs to thea tion,utterin ang or e wrari intin gwhich any wo therds or con - doing any act intended to bring the state into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against cept of patriotism evolved. The word "sedition" comes straight out of the the established government. Whereas, Patriotism is the ideology of attachment to a homeland Lawhitinc hw coomesrd -- n a"sed"turally meansand one c apaan’t bret foandrced “ toition come means under the going" umbrell ai. eof. pgoingatriotis mapa. Thus,rt. Se- ditiongovernm reefersnt is tmano theufac turingutter pingatrio ortis mw bryiting the w ayn oyf wseco. r12ds4A or of doing IPC,1860. an Lya wa coft sineditendedtion has a chilling effect on right to free speech and expression under Constitution of India. In Kedar Nath’s case apex court narrowed down the scope of sedition law in India but still government theha sestablished used the weapon g ofv seerdinmetion mantn. yW tihemes.rea Thus,s, P theat rviotismagueness is in the this laideologyw facilitates of it atottach be - meusnedt atrbitro a ahomelandrily. These incid whichents hav comese led to n quaetustironally at tandhe he oneart of cathins c’to bentrov foerrscyed reg taordi cnomeg the Section124-A lies a black-and-white issue: Can an Indian citizen justify and support a call under the umbrella of patriotism. Thus, government is manufacturing patri- for a part of the country to secede? Can a citizen point of the shortcomings of the government otismmachine byry ?the Do ews haey hofav e sea cri.g ht124A to fr eofely IPC,1860.express him sLelfa wwithou of seditiont being cha rhasged witha chilling the offence of “Sedition? The Answer to all these questions still remains unanswered. But the harsh reality is that, this law is still prevailing in India. Therefore, this paper aims to examine the role Kedar Nath’s case apex court narrowed down the scope of sedition law in of Supreme Court on Sedition law. India but still government has used the weapon of sedition many times. Thus, the vagueness in this law facilitates it to be used arbitrarily. These inci- Keywords: Sedition, Fundamental, Constitution dents have led to question at the heart of this controversy regarding the Sec- tion124-A lies a black-and-white issue: Can an Indian citizen justify and sup- port a call for a part of the country to secede? Can a citizen point of the shortcomings of the government machinery? Does he have a right to freely Answer to all these questions still remains unanswered. But the harsh reality is 1th Niashta,n tthis Mitta l a(LwL. Mis.) ,still Advo pcartee, vDelailinghi High inCo uIrndia.t Therefore, this paper aims to exam- 1 | P a g e ine the role of Supreme Court on Sedition law. Keywords : Sedition, Fundamental, Constitution 1 Nishant Mittal (LL.M.), Advocate, Delhi High Court http://legalpediajournal.com ISSN No. 2581-7949 LEGALPEDIA JOURNAL VOLUME 1 ISSUE 1 INTRODUCTION: - “As the matter of fact the essence of democracy is Criticism of Government” -K.M. Munshi2 The word Sedition does not occur in the Sec. 124-A3 or in the Defense of India Rule. It is only found as a marginal note of Sec. 124-A, and is not an operative part of the section but merely provides the name, by which the crime is defined in the section will be known. Sedition in India, a 150-year old law finds its origin in the colonial rule. It was one of the controversial laws which have been inherited from colonial regime. The rationale for sedition is based on the principle that dissemination of seditious material undermines the loyalty of citizens, that disloyal citizens jeopardize the government at Law, and that a weakened Government at Law threatens the very fabric of the state as well as public order and safety. The English law does not make mere spoken or written words treason where they do not relate to any act or design then actually on foot against the life of the king or the levying of war against and in contemplation of the speaker. But the situation is different in India, as laws on sedition and levying of war and abetment thereof are very strict. The law of sedition developed in the era of monarchy and today it violates the very purpose of the democratic government. Sedition, as we know today, was imported from the English legal system and enacted as an offence in 1870, to suppress any criticism of British policies, in pre-independent India. It became an instrument to terrorism the natives and implicate nationalist newspapers which disapproved of British colonialism. Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Annie Besant, Jogendra Chandra Bose and Mahatma Gandhi were amongst the first prominent figures to be charged with sedition. In fact, Mahatma Gandhi called it his moral duty to disobey this draconian provision, for it was enacted by an evil State. Consequently, the Constituent Assembly decided against the inclusion of sedition as one of the restrictions to the fundamental right of free speech guaranteed under article 19 of the Constitution. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru also voiced his discontent against sec. 124A by stating that "the sooner we get rid of it, the better". However, this colonial legacy continues unchecked, for protecting the sentiments of successive 2 Freedom Fighter as well as Lawyer, Constiuent assembly of India Part I Vol. VII, 1-2 December 1948, available at http.//parliamentofindia.nic.in/Is/debates/vol7p16b.html (Visited on 30/08/2018) 3 Indian Penal Code,1860 2 | P a g e ISSN No. 2581-7949 LEGALPEDIA JOURNAL VOLUME 1 ISSUE 1 Governments. It is increasingly being used to harass and intimidate journalists, human rights activists, artists and political activists, and illustrators, according to the whims of the members of the State and Central Government and other public institutions. 1. CONSTITUTIONAL PROSPECTIVE The freedom of expression guaranteed under article 19 (1) (a) of Constitution of India, include right to express their views and opinion freely. It also covers the right to criticize government, the requisite of a healthy democracy. In Terminiello v. Chicago, Justice William O. Douglas had explained the rationale behind the freedom of speech as: “a function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute; It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions.” However, “the liberty of the individual to do as he pleased even in innocent matters is not absolute” but, limited to only grounds listed in article 19(2) of Constitution of India. International law provides a general ‘three-part’ test for assessing restriction on the freedom of expression., Any restriction of the freedom of expression must be cumulatively as such; it must be provided for by law, have legitimate aims and must be ‘necessary in a democratic society like India’ A sedition law, even if manage to pass the two previous tests unable with third one. It is because it cannot be in any circumstances ‘necessary in democratic society’. While describing Section 124A Mahatma Gandhi in 1922 said “prince among the political sections of the Indian Penal Code designed to suppress liberty of the citizen.” He further said that “Affection cannot be manufactured or regulated by law”.