Supreme Court : Voicing opinion against the Government does not amount to sedition

Case: Rajat Sharma v. Union of India

The petitioner, Rajat Sharma, had accused Dr. Abdullah, who is the President of the National Conference of Jammu and Kashmir, for sedition based on his statements, which stated that he would get “Article 370 restored by taking the help of China.”

Mr. Sharma argued that Article 370 had been deleted from the Constitution by majority in Parliament.

He further stated that there are only two countries in the world which are trying to grab Indian parts of Indian territories.

Therefore, through Farooq statement it is evident that he was trying to hand over l Kashmir to China which is totally contrary to the provisions of the Constitution and amounts to sedition.

The plea also sought to terminate the Lok Sabha membership of Dr. Farooq.

A Bench consisting of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Hemant Gupta stated that there was nothing in Dr. Abdullah’s statement which the court finds so offensive as to give a cause of action for a court to initiate proceedings.

It was further stated that the expression of a view which is a dissent from a decision taken by the Central Government itself cannot be said to be seditious.

The court trashed the petition as it seemed to be a clear case of publicity interest litigation by petitioners who want to get their names in the Press.

The Bench dismissed the case levying costs on the petitioners to the tune of ₹50,000 to be deposited with the Supreme Court Advocates Welfare Fund in four weeks.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s