Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 21]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

S.G. Vombatkere vs Union Of India on 11 May, 2022

Bench: Chief Justice, Surya Kant, Hima Kohli

                                                         1


                                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                                        CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

                                      WRIT PETITION(C) No.682 OF 2021


     S.G. VOMBATKERE                                                                 … PETITIONER
                                                     Versus

     UNION OF INDIA                                                                   … RESPONDENT


                                                    WITH
                                    WRIT PETITION(C) No.552 OF 2021
                                    WRIT PETITION(C) No.773 OF 2021
                                     WRIT PETITION(C) No.1181 OF 2021
                                   WRIT PETITION(Crl.) No.304 OF 2021
                                     WRIT PETITION(C) No.1381 OF 2021
                                   WRIT PETITION(Crl.) No.307 OF 2021
                                   WRIT PETITION(Crl.) No.498 OF 2021
                                   WRIT PETITION(Crl.) No.106 OF 2021

                                                O    R    D     E   R

                    1.     These      petitions          are         filed          challenging        the

                    Constitutionality of Section 124 A of the Indian Penal Code 1860

                    (hereinafter IPC) relating to the offence of Sedition.

                   2.      Having heard learned Senior counsel appearing for the

                   parties and perusing the documents available on record, we may

                   observe that this matter was listed for the first time on

                   15.07.2021.      Thereinafter,        this       Court,        after    hearing    the

                   parties, issued notice on 27.04.2022. When this matter was next

                   taken    up,    learned    Solicitor        General       of    India    prayed    for

                   additional time of 2 to 3 days for filing of counter-affidavit.

                   Accordingly, time was granted till the end of the week for
Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed by
SATISH KUMAR YADAV
Date: 2022.05.11
15:12:01 IST
                   filing    counter-affidavit.      Again,         the   matter      was    listed   on
Reason:



                   05.05.2022,      wherein    the       Solicitor        General         again   sought

                   additional time to file a counter affidavit. On that date, this
                                    2

Court while granting the Solicitor General time to file counter

affidavit,    directed        the   parties   to   file       their   written

submissions   on   the    preliminary     issue    of   the    necessity   of

reference to a larger bench prior to the next date of hearing.

3.   Accordingly,        on    07.05.2022,    written   submissions      were

filed on behalf of Solicitor General of India.

4.   On 09.05.2022, an affidavit was filed on behalf of Union

of India, averring as under:


     “3. I state and submit that so far as Section 124A
     is   concerned,   there   are   divergence   of   views
     expressed in public domain by various jurists,
     academicians, intellectuals and citizens in general.
     While they agree about the need for statutory
     provisions to deal       with     serious offences of
     divisive nature affecting the very sovereignty and
     integrity   of    the   Country,    acts   leading   to
     destabilizing the government established by law by
     means not authorised by law or prohibited by law.
     Requiring a     penal Provision for such purposes is
     generally accepted     by everyone     in    legitimate
     State interest. However, concerns are raised about
     its   application and abuse      for the purposes not
     intended by law.

     4.   The Hon’ble Prime Minister of India has been
     cognizant of various views expressed on the subject
     and has also periodically, in various forums,
     expressed his clear and unequivocal views in favour
     of protection of civil liberties, respect for human
     rights and giving meaning to the constitutionally
     cherished freedoms by the people of the country. He
     has repeatedly said that one of India’s strengths is
     the   diverse  thought   streams  that   beautifully
     flourish in our country.

     5. The Hon’ble PM believes that at a time when our
     nation is marking ‘Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav’ (75
     years since independence) we need to, as a nation,
     work even harder to shed colonial baggage that has
     passed its utility, which includes outdated colonial
     laws and practices. In that spirit, the Government
     of India has scrapped over 1500 outdated law since
     2014-15. It has also ended over 25,000 compliance
                                    3

        burdens which were causing unnecessary hurdles to
        people of our country. Various offences which were
        causing mindless hindrances to people have been de-
        criminalised. This is an ongoing process. These were
        laws and compliances which reeked of a colonial mind
        set and thus have no place in today’s India.

        6. The Government of India, being fully cognizant of
        various view being expressed on the subject of
        sedition and also having considered the concern of
        civil liberties and human rights, while committed to
        maintain and protect the sovereignty and integrity
        of this great nation, has decided to re-examine and
        re-consider the provision of section 124A of the
        Indian Penal Code which can only be done before the
        Competent Forum.

        7. In view of the aforesaid it is this respectfully
        submitted that this Hon’ble Court may not invest
        time in examining the validity of Section 124A once
        again and be pleased to await the exercise of
        reconsideration to be undertaken by the Government
        of India before an appropriate forum where such
        reconsideration is constitutionally.”

5.      In view of the above, it is clear that the Union of India

agrees with the prima facie opinion expressed by this Court

that the rigors of Section 124A of IPC is not in tune with the

current social milieu, and was intended for a time when this

country was under the colonial regime. In light of the same,

the Union of India may reconsider the aforesaid provision of

law.

6.      This   Court   is    cognizant   of   security     interests     and

integrity of the State on one hand, and the civil liberties of

citizens on the other. There is a requirement to balance both

sets of considerations, which is a difficult exercise. The case

of the petitioners is that this provision of law dates back to

1898,   and    pre-dates    the   Constitution   itself,   and   is    being

misused. The Attorney General had also, on an earlier date of
                                     4

hearing,      given    some   instances    of     glaring   misuse    of    this

provision, like in the case of recital of the Hanuman Chalisa.

7.      Therefore, we expect that, till the re-examination of the

provision is complete, it will be appropriate not to continue

the usage of the aforesaid provision of law by the Governments.

8.      In view of the clear stand taken by the Union of India,

we deem it appropriate to pass the following order in the

interest of justice:

     a. The interim stay granted in W.P.(Crl.)No.217/2021 along

       with   W.P.(Crl.)No.216/2021        vide    order    dated    31.05.2021

       shall continue to operate till further orders.

     b. We hope and expect that the State and Central Governments

       will restrain from registering any FIR, continuing any

       investigation or taking any coercive measures by invoking

       Section 124A of IPC while the aforesaid provision of law

       is under consideration.

     c. If any fresh case is registered under Section 124A of IPC,

       the    affected     parties   are   at   liberty     to   approach   the

       concerned Courts for appropriate relief. The Courts are

       requested      to   examine   the   reliefs    sought,     taking    into

       account the present order passed as well as the clear

       stand taken by the Union of India.

     d. All pending trials, appeals and proceedings with respect

       to the charge framed under Section 124A of IPC be kept in

       abeyance. Adjudication with respect to other Sections, if

       any, could proceed if the Courts are of the opinion that
                                     5

        no prejudice would be caused to the accused.

      e. In addition to the above, the Union of India shall be at

        liberty   to   issue   the   Directive   as   proposed   and   placed

        before us, to the State Governments/Union Territories to

        prevent any misuse of Section 124A of IPC.

      f. The above directions may continue till further orders are

        passed.


9.       List these petitions in the third week of July, 2022.




                                           .........................CJI.
                                           (N.V. RAMANA)



                                           ..............…….........J.
                                            (SURYA KANT)



                                            ..............…..........J.
                                            (HIMA KOHLI)

NEW DELHI;
MAY 11, 2022.
                                     6

ITEM NOS.301 TO 306            COURT NO.1             SECTIONS PIL-W/X

                 S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
                        RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
                   Writ Petition (Civil) No.682/2021

S.G. VOMBATKERE                                        Petitioner(s)
                                    VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA                                         Respondent(s)

WITH
W.P.(C) No. 552/2021 (X)
(FOR ADMISSION and IA No.62095/2021-APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS)
W.P.(C) No. 773/2021 (PIL-W)
(FOR ADMISSION)
Writ Petition(Civil) No.1181/2021
W.P.(Crl.) No. 304/2021 (X)
(FOR ADMISSION and IA No.84068/2021-APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM
FILING ORIGINAL VAKALATNAMA/OTHER DOCUMENT)
Writ Petition(Civil) No.1381/2021
(FOR   ADMISSION  and   IA   No.168874/2021-EXEMPTION  FROM  FILING
AFFIDAVIT)
Writ Petition (Criminal) No.307/2021
(FOR ADMISSION and IA No.85946/2021-STAY APPLICATION and IA
No.85962/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT)
Writ Petition(Criminal) No.498/2021
Writ Petition(Criminal) No.106/2021
(IA No. 87150/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT, IA
No.78482/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT, IA No. 27982/2021
- EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT, IA No. 86234/2021 - INTERVENTION
APPLICATION, IA No. 78477/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No.
77708/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 77529/2021 -
INTERVENTION APPLICATION & IA No. 27978/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE
LENGTHY LIST OF DATES)

Date : 11-05-2022 These petitions were called on for hearing today.

CORAM :
          HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT
          HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

For Petitioner(s)     Mr.   Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv.
                      Mr.   Prashant Kumar, Adv.
                      Mr.   Anubhav Kumar, Adv.
                      Mr.   Amarjit Singh Bedi, AOR
                      Ms.   Riya Seth, Adv.
                      Mr.   Varun Chandiok, Adv.


                      Dr. Rajiv Dhavan, Sr.Adv.
                      Mr. Prashant Bhushan, AOR
                      Mr. Arun Shourie, In-person
               7

Mr. Rahul Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Alice Raj, Adv.

Mr.   Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv.
Mr.   P.B. Suresh, Adv.
Mr.   Prasanna S., AOR
Mr.   Nizam Pasha, Adv.
Mr.   Yuvraj Singh Rathore, Adv.
Mr.   Agnish Aditya, Adv.
Ms.   Swati Arya, Adv.
Ms.   Aparajita Jamwal, Adv.

Mr.   Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Sr. Adv.
Ms.   Pooja Dhar, AOR
Mr.   Chitranshul Singh, Adv.
Ms.   Jhanvi Dubey, Adv.
Mr.   Shrutanjaya Bharadwaj, Adv.
Ms.   Ishita Chowdhury, Adv.
Ms.   Shivani Vij, Adv.
Ms.   Tanya Srivastava, Adv.
Ms.   Aditi Gupta, Adv.
Mr.   Pratul Pratap Singh, Adv.

Mr.   Salman Khurshid, Sr. Adv.
Mr.   Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, AOR
Mr.   Tanveer Ahmad Khan, Adv.
Mr.   Tauqeer Ahmad Khan, Adv.
Ms.   Jyoti Singh, Adv.
Ms.   Aadya Mishra, Adv.
Ms.   Kanishka Prasad, Adv.
Mr.   Ibad Mushtaq, Adv.

Ms. Aparna Bhat, AOR
Ms. Karishma Maria, Adv.
Mr. Satwik Parikh, Adv.

Ms.   Vrinda Grover, Adv.
Mr.   Soutik Banerjee, Adv.
Ms.   Mannat Tipnis, Adv.
Mr.   Aakarsh Kamra, AOR

Mr.   Chandar Uday Singh, Sr. Adv.
Mr.   Rahul Narayan, AOR
Ms.   Vrinda Bhandari, Adv.
Mr.   Abhinav Sekhri, Adv.
Mr.   Apar Gupta, Adv.
Mr.   Tanmay Singh, Adv.
Mr.   Krishnesh Bapat, Adv.
Ms.   Anandita Mishra, Adv.
Ms.   Natasha Maheshwari, Adv.
Ms.   Amala Dasarath, Adv.

Mr. Siddharth Seem, Adv.
                                   8

                    Mr. Satya Mitra, AOR

For Respondent(s)   Mr.   Tushar Mehta, SG
                    Mr.   K.M. Nataraj, ASG
                    Mr.   N. Venkatraman, ASG
                    Mr.   K.M. Nataraj, ASG.
                    Mr.   Suryaprakash V.Raju, ASG
                    Mr.   Rajat Nair, Adv.
                    Mr.   Kanu Agrawal, Adv.
                    Mr.   Shantnu Sharma, Adv.
                    Ms.   Deepaabali Datta, Adv.
                    Mr.   Madhav Sinhal, Adv.
                    Ms.   Suhasini Sen, Adv.
                    Mr.   Balaji Srinivasan, Adv.
                    Mr.   Siddhant Kohli, Adv.
                    Mr.   K. Parameshwar, Adv.
                    Mr.   Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR
                    Mr.   B.V. Balaram Das,AOR (N.P.)

                    Mr. Kaleeswaram Raj, Adv.
                    Mr. Mohammed Sadique T.A., AOR
                    Mrs. Anu K. Joy, Adv.
                    Mr. Alim Anvar, Adv.
                    Mr. Thulasi K. Raj, Adv.
                    Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, AOR

                    Mr.   P.V. Surendra Nath, Sr. Adv.
                    Mr.   Subhash Chandran K.R., Adv.
                    Ms.   Yogamaya M.G., Adv.
                    Ms.   Resmitha R. Chandran, AOR

                    Mr.   Arvind Datar, Sr. Adv.
                    Ms.   Nisha Bhambhani, Adv.
                    Mr.   Rahul Bhatia, AOR
                    Mr.   Rahul Unnikrishnan, Adv.
                    Mr.   Harshvardhan Kotla Adv.
                    Ms.   Vishakha Gupta, Adv.
                    Mr.   Rohan J. Alva, Adv.

                    Mr.   Namit Saxena, AOR
                    Mr.   Sharath Chandran, Adv.
                    Mr.   Awnish Maithani, Adv.
                    Mr.   Sudhanshu Chandra, Adv.

          UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                             O R D E R

For the reasons stated in the signed order, we deem it appropriate to pass the following order in the interest of justice:

             a.     The      interim    stay    granted   in      W.P.
                                       9

             (Crl.)No.217/2021         along         with    W.P.(Crl.)No.216/2021

vide order dated 31.05.2021 shall continue to operate till further orders.

b. We hope and expect that the State and Central Governments will restrain from registering any FIR, continuing any investigation or taking any coercive measures by invoking Section 124A of IPC while the aforesaid provision of law is under consideration.

c. If any fresh case is registered under Section 124A of IPC, the affected parties are at liberty to approach the concerned Courts for appropriate relief. The Courts are requested to examine the reliefs sought, taking into account the present order passed as well as the clear stand taken by the Union of India.

d. All pending trials, appeals and proceedings with respect to the charge framed under Section 124A of IPC be kept in abeyance. Adjudication with respect to other Sections, if any, could proceed if the Courts are of the opinion that no prejudice would be caused to the accused.

e. In addition to the above, the Union of India shall be at liberty to issue the Directive as proposed and placed before us, to the State Governments/Union Territories to prevent any misuse of Section 124A of IPC.

f. The above directions may continue till further orders are passed.

List these petitions in the third week of July, 2022.

(SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (R.S. NARAYANAN) DEPUTY REGISTRAR COURT MASTER (NSH) (Signed order is placed on the file) 10