The Bombay High Court on Tuesday stayed the implementation of the Maharashtra Government’s controversial circular vesting among other things powers with the police to invoke Section 124-A (Sedition) of Indian Penal Code (IPC) against people, for their “words/signs, or representations” spoken or made against politicians or public servants who are representatives of the Government.
Hearing a public interest litigation (PIl) filed by lawyer Narendra Sharma seeking the quashing of the August 27, 2015 circular on the ground that it was in violation of the Fundamental Rights of a person, a HC Division Bench of Justices VM Kanade and Shalini Phansalkar Joshi directed the Maharashtra Government to withdraw the controversial circular laying down guidelines for invocation of the sedition charges and issue a fresh one in its place if necessary.
“The circular should be withdrawn or a fresh circular should be issued. The State shall not act on the existing circular,” the HC Bench observed, as it asked the Government to file its reply to the two petitions — one by Sharma and another one filed earlier by Aseem Trivedi.
The HC Bench also told the State Government that in the event of it filing its reply at the next hearing, the court would decide on the two petitions.
In his PIl, petitioner-lawyer Sharma stated that the controversial circular would rob people of freedom of speech and expression. He also stated the police might not have the “requisite” training to comprehend the consequences of imposing such a “stringent” provision.
The guidelines issued to various Police Stations in Maharashtra, through its August 27, 2015 circular, had sparked vociferous protests in the State, with various Opposition parties and civil society members dubbing the move to attempt to “muzzle” the voice of the Opposition parties and citizens.
The guidelines on the pre-conditions for invocation of the Section 124-A (Sedition) were issued in accordance with the assurance given by the State Advocate General in an affidavit submitted before the Bombay High Court in the cartoonist Aseem Trivedi case.
The State Government had given an assurance to this effect to the HC, after the sedition charges were dropped against Trivedi, who had been arrested by Mumbai Police on September 8, 2012 for drawing cartoons that allegedly insulted the National Emblems and Parliament.
On its part, the High Court had slammed the State Government for its move to invoke sedition charge against Trivedi for publishing controversial cartoons on the ‘India Against Corruption’ website, and granted him bail. The State Government later dropped sedition charges but proceeded to act on the other penal charges.
Though the controversial circular disallows the police from invoking 124-A (Sedition) for “all such comments expressing disapproval or criticism of the Government with a view to obtaining a change of Government by lawful means”, one of the guidelines mentioned in the circular have proved to be a major bone of contention between the BJP-led saffron alliance Government and the Opposition parties and like-minded civil society members.
In its affidavit, the Government had told the High Court that one of the pre-conditions for invoking Section 124 ( A) was: “Words signs or representations against politicians or public servants by themselves do not fall in this category, unless the words/ signs/ representations show them as representatives of the Government.”
In an apparent tweaking of the said guideline, the circular issued by the Home Department of the Government in Marathi states: that the police could invoke Section 124-A of IPC against such persons for their “the words, signs and representations made against such politicians or public servants who are representatives of the Government.”