The Bar of Dissent and Hate Speech Vis-à-Vis Sedition Laws

  • Palak Arora and Pranav Singal
  • Show Author Details
  • Palak Arora

    Lawyer at Delhi, India.

  • Pranav Singal

    Advocate at A.K. Vali and Co., India

  • img Save PDF

Abstract

This article takes the subjective analysis on the recent rise of sedition charges and suppressed right to dissent. In the Indian Democracy, the innate right of freedom of speech is not absolute because the constitution itself states reasonable restrictions to protect the integrity, security, and unity of the state. This is why some of the outrageous laws which can be easily misused in order to hide the real narrative and criticism against the government are still in existence. This article holds the holistic viewpoint on the thin line between hate speeches and necessary criticism. The difference is causing people years in custody without getting fair trials. As a part of Judicial Activism, the Supreme Court benches reiterated the landmark judgments that are the extension to describe when sedition laws can or should be charged on the accused. The rising cases of sedition charges where more than 3/4th of the accused were acquitted fairly are the depiction of how the laws are being overused to set in the fear against racing the voice of dissent. It is prominent to use the freedom of speech justifiably without being afraid of law enforcement. The article narrows down the issue and suggestions as a path to improvement.

Type

Research Paper

Information

International Journal of Law Management and Humanities, Volume 4, Issue 5, Page 869 - 873

DOI: https://doij.org/10.10000/IJLMH.111953

Creative Commons

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution -NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits remixing, adapting, and building upon the work for non-commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.

Copyright

Copyright © IJLMH 2021