Kolkata/Guwahati, May 11 (PTI) Human rights activists and those accused in sedition cases on Wednesday welcomed the “historic” order of the Supreme Court putting on hold the colonial-era penal law, and demanded repeal of the legislation.
They alleged that the sedition law was being used by governments to silence the voice of protest.
“To free India from the colonial legacy, the Supreme Court order will play a historic role in strengthening the democracy of India,” Assam MLA Akhil Gogoi, who has 22 sedition cases filed against him, told PTI.
Human rights activist Sujato Bhadra said that the order will protect the rights of the citizens who are going to oppose the government.
“The Supreme Court order is historic. It confirms the rights of the citizens under the Constitution,” Bhadra said in Kolkata.
Senior journalist Manjit Mahanta, who is now a spokesperson of Assam Congress and an accused in a sedition case, claimed that the application of the law has always been undemocratic by the ruling dispensation.
The apex court on Wednesday put on hold the law on sedition till an “appropriate” government forum re-examines it and directed the Centre and states not to register any fresh FIR invoking the offence.
Claiming that the law from the British Raj era is a repressive one and has no place in independent India, Bhadra said that human rights activists in the country are in favour of complete repeal of the law.
A large number of political activists are charged under the contentious sedition law under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code, he claimed.
“This government (in West Bengal) opposes the UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act) but charges alleged Maoists under the sedition law,” he told PTI.
Bhadra cited three such cases in recent times.
“There have been hundreds of cases filed against me since I started protesting against anti-people policies of Congress governments. However, the first sedition case was filed in 2016 after the BJP came to power (in Assam),” Gogoi said in Guwahati.
Since then, the BJP government has registered a total of 22 FIRs against him under Section 124A of the IPC, the Raijor Dal president said.
“Most of the cases are related to my protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill. Some sedition cases are related to anti-big dam protests and agitation against toll gates,” he said.
Welcoming the decision of the Supreme Court, Gogoi termed the verdict “historic”.
“The BJP used this law very frequently just to silence opposition leaders. This showed the BJP’s dictatorial attitude. I am thankful to the Supreme Court for its initiative to uphold civil liberties,” said Mahanta, who is also facing a sedition case for his protest against the CAA.
In February 2019, the then Parliamentary Affairs Minister Chandra Mohan Patowary informed the Assam assembly that 245 sedition cases were filed against various individuals and banned organisations since May 26, 2016, when the first BJP-led coalition government took charge.
In the North-eastern state, most of the sedition cases have been registered against insurgents of various militant groups.
However, others including prominent citizens were also charged under this colonial-era law for their statements and works against the policies of the government.
In January 2019, Assam Police registered a suo motu sedition case against Sahitya Akademi awardee litterateur Dr Hiren Gohain, Manjit Mahanta and Akhil Gogoi for0 their remarks against the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill.
Sharjeel Imam, a JNU student and an accused in an anti-CAA violence case, was booked under IPC Section 124A in January 2020 after he had spoken about alleged torture meted out to Muslim people during the preparation of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam.
Anirban Roy Choudhury, who runs a news portal in Cachar district of Assam’s Bengali-speaking Barak Valley, was named in a sedition case in December 2021 for allegedly creating division among the Assamese and Bengali people through his editorial. PTI AMR TR NN NN
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
Source: The Print
