Sedition
Sedition was a criminal offence under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code that punished speech or actions intended to bring hatred or contempt against the government; it has been repealed and replaced by Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
What is Sedition?
**Sedition** refers to speech, writing, or conduct that is intended to incite disaffection, hatred, or contempt against the established government or the state. Historically, sedition laws were designed to punish those who attempted to undermine the authority of the government through words or actions that could provoke public disorder or rebellion.
In India, sedition was one of the most controversial criminal offences, punishable under **Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)**. With the repeal of the IPC and its replacement by the **Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS)**, the offence of sedition as defined under Section 124A has been abolished. In its place, **Section 152 of the BNS** introduces a reformulated offence that targets acts endangering the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India.
Legal Framework: From Section 124A IPC to Section 152 BNS
Section 124A IPC (Repealed)
Section 124A of the IPC defined sedition as follows: Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the Government established by law, was punishable with imprisonment for life or imprisonment up to three years, along with a fine.
Key aspects of the old law:
- The offence was **cognizable** (police could arrest without a warrant) and **non-bailable**.
- The punishment extended up to **life imprisonment**.
- The explanations to Section 124A clarified that expressing disapproval of government measures with a view to obtaining their alteration by lawful means, without exciting hatred, contempt, or disaffection, did not constitute sedition.
Section 152 BNS, 2023 (Current Law)
Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 replaces the old sedition provision with a differently worded offence. It punishes acts that **endanger the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India** through words, signs, visible representation, electronic communication, or financial means that excite or attempt to excite **secession** or **armed rebellion**, or encourage **subversive activities** or feelings of **separatism**.
Key differences from Section 124A:
- The word **"sedition" has been dropped** from the statute.
- The focus has shifted from "disaffection against the government" to acts endangering **sovereignty, unity, and integrity** of India.
- **Electronic communication** is explicitly included as a medium through which the offence can be committed.
- The offence carries imprisonment up to **life imprisonment** or imprisonment up to **seven years** with a fine.
Historical Context
Colonial Origins
Section 124A was introduced into the IPC in 1870, during British colonial rule, primarily to suppress the Indian freedom movement. It was famously used against:
- **Bal Gangadhar Tilak (1897 and 1908)** — Prosecuted for his writings in the newspaper *Kesari* that were deemed seditious by the colonial government.
- **Mahatma Gandhi (1922)** — Charged with sedition for articles published in *Young India*. Gandhi called Section 124A the "prince among the political sections of the IPC designed to suppress the liberty of the citizen."
- **Jawaharlal Nehru** and numerous other freedom fighters.
Post-Independence Debate
After independence, there was considerable debate about whether sedition should continue as an offence in a democratic republic. During the drafting of the Constitution, the word "sedition" was deliberately **excluded** from the reasonable restrictions on free speech under Article 19(2). Despite this, Section 124A remained on the statute books.
Landmark Judgments
- **Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962) AIR SC 955:** The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Section 124A but read it down significantly. The court held that only speech that has a **tendency to incite violence or public disorder** can be punished as sedition. Mere criticism of the government, however strong, does not constitute sedition unless it is accompanied by incitement to violence.
- **Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) 5 SCC 1:** While this case primarily dealt with Section 66A of the IT Act, it reinforced the principle that restrictions on free speech must be narrowly drawn and that mere online speech cannot be criminalised without a clear tendency to cause public disorder.
- **S.G. Vombatkere v. Union of India (2022):** The Supreme Court effectively put Section 124A on hold by directing the government not to register any new cases under the provision while it was being reconsidered. This order remained in effect until the IPC was replaced by the BNS.
Practical Examples
**Example 1:** A political activist publishes articles on social media sharply criticising the ruling government's economic policies and calling for its defeat in elections. Under the Kedar Nath Singh standard, this would **not** constitute sedition (or an offence under Section 152 BNS), because it is legitimate political criticism without incitement to violence or armed rebellion.
**Example 2:** A person delivers speeches calling for a particular region to secede from India through armed struggle and distributes pamphlets encouraging people to take up arms against the state. This could constitute an offence under Section 152 of the BNS, as it involves incitement to secession and armed rebellion.
**Example 3:** A journalist writes an investigative report exposing corruption in a government department, using strong language against the officials involved. This is protected expression and does not amount to sedition or any offence under Section 152 BNS, as it is legitimate journalism aimed at public accountability.
When Does This Term Matter?
- **Freedom of speech and expression** — The sedition law directly impacts the boundaries of free speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
- **Journalism and media** — Journalists and editors need to understand the distinction between legitimate criticism of the government and speech that crosses into incitement.
- **Political activism** — Activists and opposition politicians have historically been the most common targets of sedition charges.
- **Online speech** — With the inclusion of electronic communication in Section 152 BNS, social media posts, blogs, and online videos can potentially attract prosecution.
- **Human rights and civil liberties** — Sedition laws are closely watched by civil liberties organisations as potential tools for suppressing dissent.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is criticising the government still a criminal offence in India?
No. Criticising the government, its policies, or its officials is a constitutionally protected right under Article 19(1)(a). The Supreme Court in Kedar Nath Singh made it clear that only speech that incites violence or tends to create public disorder can be prosecuted. Section 152 of the BNS similarly targets acts that endanger sovereignty, unity, and integrity through incitement to secession or armed rebellion — not ordinary political criticism.
What is the difference between the old Section 124A IPC and the new Section 152 BNS?
The key difference is in the framing of the offence. Section 124A punished speech that brought "hatred or contempt" or excited "disaffection" against the government. Section 152 BNS punishes acts that endanger the "sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India" by exciting secession, armed rebellion, or subversive activities. The new provision drops the word "sedition" and shifts the focus from criticism of the government to threats against the nation's integrity. It also explicitly covers electronic communication.
Can someone be arrested under the sedition law for social media posts?
Under Section 152 of the BNS, electronic communication is explicitly included as a medium through which the offence can be committed. However, a mere social media post criticising the government would not attract prosecution. The post would need to incite secession, armed rebellion, or subversive activities that endanger the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India. Police must apply the standards established by the Supreme Court in Kedar Nath Singh before making any arrest.
Has anyone been convicted of sedition in recent years?
Conviction rates under Section 124A were historically very low. The National Crime Records Bureau data showed that while a significant number of cases were registered, very few resulted in conviction. This low conviction rate was itself cited as evidence that the law was being misused to harass dissenting voices rather than to address genuine threats to public order. With the repeal of Section 124A and the introduction of Section 152 BNS, the application of the new provision remains to be seen.
Disclaimer: This glossary entry is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
Related Legal Terms
FIR (First Information Report)
A First Information Report (FIR) is a written document prepared by the police when they receive information about the commission of a cognizable offence, marking the first step in the criminal investigation process.
Cognizable Offence
A cognizable offence is an offence in which a police officer can arrest the accused without a warrant and begin investigation without prior permission from a magistrate.
Bail Bond
A bail bond is a written undertaking, with or without sureties, executed by or on behalf of an accused person, guaranteeing their appearance before the court on specified dates in exchange for their release from custody.