• Dr. Binalben Sanjaykumar Patel I/C Principal, Law College, Himatnagar. Gujarat


Sedition, Freedom of Speech, Constitution, Fundamental Rights


The right to freedom of expression is a critical component of the fundamental rights given by the Indian Constitution. With repeated advancements in the individual's thoughts and modes of expression, as well as revisions to Indian legislation, there is little room for bygone and dictatorial British restrictions. However, given that this antiquated statute is still in force, it is truly shocking to observe that, despite more than 70 years of independence, neither the Parliament nor the state legislatures have dared to change the requirements contained in Sec. 124. Indeed, it is worth noting that the British Parliament abolished sedition as a crime in 2009, sending a message to other nations to follow suit and embrace true freedom of speech and expression, even though the UK is said to have incorporated far more stringent laws into its counter-terrorism legislations. In New Zealand, too, the sedition statute was repealed in 2007 on the basis that it contained elements that violated natural justice and the rule of law. Australia, Canada, Indonesia, and South Korea have all repealed sedition laws. This statute continues to provide the government with an opportunity to assume the role of colonial government. Thus, the question is whether to preserve or remove Section 124A. Sedition, as a criminal offence, is also viewed as a constraint on the exercise of the freedom protected by Article 19(1). (a). The book, in its whole, seeks to ascertain if it is a legislation or a weapon that has been widely abused, thereby curtailing freedom of speech and expression.


I. (2004) 4CHN 406.

II. (2009) 3 RCR (Cri) 224.

III. (2011) 266 ELT 193.

IV. 1995(1) SCR 411.

V. A.K.Gopalan v. State of Madras , AIR 1951 SC 21

VI. AIR 1962 SC 124.

VII. Eric Barendt , (2003) , Interests in Freedom of Speech : Theory and Practices in Legal explorations..

VIII. http://mha.gov.in/MHA1/Par20...fs/LS-16032021/281.pdf

IX. http://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thehindu.com/news/national/is-this-law-necessary-sc-seeks-centres-responsw-on-pleas-challenging-sedition-law/article35336402.ece/amp.

X. https://m.economicstimes.com/news/india/time-has-come-to-define-limits-of-sedition-law-supreme-court-/articleshow/83125219.cms

XI. ILR(2013) 1 Ker 793.

XII. Kedar Nath Sehgal v. Emperor , AIR 1929 Lah 817.

XIII. King Emperor v. Sadashiv Narayan Bhalerao , (1947)49 Bom LR 526.

XIV. Law Commission of India “39th report on punishment of imprisonment for life under the IPC” (July,1968).

XV. Law Commission of India “42nd report on IPC 1860”(June 1971).

XVI. Niharendu Dutt v. King Emperor , AIR 1942 FC 22.

XVII. PSA Pillia , Criminal Law 1131 (K.L.Vibhute, ed. 2009).

XVIII. Queen Empress v. Bal Gangadhar Tilak , ILR(1898) 22 Bom 112.

XIX. Rex v. Aldred , (1909)22 coxCC 1.

Additional Files