Misuse Of ‘Sedition’ Law on Rise to Silence the Peaceful Protesters
Disha Ravi, 22, a Climate Activist, was picked by Delhi police from her Bengaluru residence for questioning in a ‘toolkit’ case on February 13. The court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate granted the police her custody. She was alleged to be a “key conspirator” in creating a controversial toolkit aimed to “tarnish India’s image” abroad, by helping farmers’ on-going protest against three laws. Police also blamed that she “collaborated with pro-Khalistani group Poetic Justice Foundation (PJF)” to “spread disaffection against Indian state”.
The pro-establishment media was quick to call her names to tarnish her image. A senior Minister in Haryana called for her ‘complete destruction’ and an MP from her home state, Karnataka was quick to call her a ‘parallel’ to a ‘terrorist’. Fortunately, it was quickly discovered that Disha Ravi ‘Joseph’ is not alien but belongs to the politically strong Lingayat community of her state, Karnataka. Disha also happened to be lucky that a court of ASJ in Delhi granted her bail on the first day of hearing (23 Feb) and also released her the same day. A pregnant young woman Safoora Zargar, who was slapped identical charges for raising her voice against CAA last year, was not so lucky to get relief from the same court.
With the arrest of Disha, the Police have also issued non-bailable arrest warrants against two others, Nikita Jacob and Shantanu Muluk for their role in creating the toolkit. Muluk was granted protection against arrest. The issue of the toolkit gets prominence after Swedish Climate activist Greta Thunberg (18) tweeted the kit with her support to farmers’ protest. Her name had come up twice for Nobel Prize. The MEA took exception from the established practice and reacted to an individual’s comment.
The episode suggests that the Delhi Police is confusing protest/dissent with the ‘sedition’ or ‘war against the state’. WhatsApp conversations between Disha and Thunberg were also leaked in support of the allegation that the ‘accused’ was in regular contact with her to provoke international support against the farm laws being opposed by the farmers.
In his landmark judgment, ASJ Dharmender Rana demarcated between ‘sedition’ and the peaceful dissent to a state action considered contrary to the nation’s interest. He said, “The nub of the issue is whether applicant/accused Disha was merely involved in peaceful protest and dissent against the farm acts or she was actually involved in seditious activities under the guise of protesting against the said legislation.” Rejecting presumptuous pieces of evidence, Judge Rana noted, “Considering the scanty and sketchy evidence available on record, I do not find any palpable reason to breach the general rule of ‘Bail’ against a 22-year-old young lady, with absolutely blemish-free criminal antecedents and having firm roots in the society, and send her to jail.”
Judge Rana noted, “Still further, there is nothing on record to suggest that there was any call, incitement, instigation, or exhortation on the part of the applicant/accused and the above-said organisations and their associates to foment violence on January 26, 2021” and that “In the absence of any evidence to the effect that the applicant/accused agree or share a common purpose to cause violence on January 26, 2021, with the founders of PJF, it cannot be presumed by resorting to surmises or conjectures that she also supported the secessionist tendencies or the violence caused on January 26 simply because she shared a platform with people, who have gathered to oppose the legislation.”
He reminded the prosecutors, “The citizens are conscience keepers of government in any democratic Nation” and “cannot be put behind the bars simply because they choose to disagree with the State policies.”
A reading of the court order, in this case, raises the question how to curb the tendency of arresting people under Section 124 ‘sedition’ and Section 124 A, ‘prompting enmity between sections of the people’ against the scope and the limitations of these sections by the Supreme Court and various High Courts. These sections of the laws have become tools in the hands of the Government to wantonly punish citizens without any crime and snatch their liberty for years. As per the National Crime Records Bureau 14,360 people were arrested for alleged offences against the state including ‘sedition’ and disharmony in 2016; 16,210 in 2017, 13,160 in 2018 and 12,140 in 2019 while convictions in these years were 769, 1,734, 2,269 and 1,739, respectively. Acquittals were 1,887, 3,237, 3,490, and 3,538 respectively. Besides a large number of cases, from these, and earlier years, are pending. This is clearly misuse of the power in dereliction of constitutional obligations which also causes overcrowding the jails.
In recent years large numbers of citizens were thrown behind the bars like Dr. Kafeel Khan, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima, Safoora Zargar, Asif Iqbal Tanha, Devangana Kalita, Natasha Narwal, Khalid Saifi, Shifa Ur Rehman, Sharjeel Imam, Akhil Gogo and Umar Khalid, etc. In a detailed statement, UN Gen. Sec. has observed, “These arrests seem clearly designed to send a chilling message to India’s vibrant civil society that criticism of government policies will not be tolerated.”
Peaceful protest is not a crime but a legitimate part of democracy. Depriving people to exercise their legitimate right, snatching their right to dissent and turning a deaf ear arrogantly to their grievances may cause violent expression of anger. The establishment should not be crazy to curb genuine dissent and campaigns by misusing the police force. Investigative agencies should also not become servants of ruling cliques but saviours of the nation and the people. For justice, people’s last resort is the court. If some judgments cause the impression of the double standard, will be unethical as well as adding fuel and flaming distrust.
Prompt hearing and strong-worded bail order of Judge Dharmender Rana has set an example for the judiciary. It is as reasoned and compassionate, as enshrined in the principles of justice and upheld by the higher judiciary. It amazingly displays the capability of a Judge to deliver promptly and protect an accused from physical, mental, and psychological torcher. Delays and laxity are generally caused by the tactics of prosecutors with ill-intention to penalise a person without a court judgment.
There are scores of SC and HCs Judgements to deal with such cases. Judge Rana has quoted SC in Kedar Nath v State of Bihar 1962, and the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Balbir Singh Saina v State of Haryana 1989, which laid down the centrality of violence in sedition. The Mumbai High Court in the matter of Arun G Gowli v State of Maharashtra 1998, observed that conspiracy cannot be proved merely on the basis of inferences that are not backed by evidence.
[The writer is Chairman Forum for Civil Rights. Email: [email protected]]