It's Time We Define Limits Of Sedition: SC Stays Coercive Actions Against Telugu Channels On Sedition FIR

What is the case

• In the FIRs filed by Andhra Pradesh police charging sedition against two Telugu broadcasters, TV5 news and ABN Andhra Jyoti, the Supreme Court on Monday delayed coercive action against them.
• The channels have filed writs seeking the quashing of FIRs as well as contempt petitions alleging that the Andhra Police action breached the Supreme Court's April 30 ruling prohibiting citizens from being arrested or prosecuted for airing objections over COVID concerns.
• Senior Advocates Shyam Divan and Sidharth Luthra, representing TV5 News and ABN Andhra Jyoti, respectively, argued that FIRs were filed against the channels for airing the press statements of YSCRP rebel MP Raghu Rama Krishnam Raju.

Details of the case

• The FIRs are an attempt to "muzzle media freedom," according to a bench consisting of Justices DY Chandrachud, L Nageswara Rao, and S Ravindra Bhat.
• "It's past time for us to establish the boundaries of sedition," Justice DY Chandrachud said. The bench noted that, in the context of media freedom, it was necessary to clarify the scope of offences under Sections 124A (sedition) and 153A (promotion of communal hatred) of the Indian Penal Code.
• A three-judge panel served notice on a petition challenging the legality of Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code on April 30. The bench issued notifications on the news networks' petitions and postponed coercive measures against them until the next hearing date.
• Despite Mr Luthra's request for an investigation stay, the bench stated that it will merely postpone coercive action for the time being. The appeals ask for the FIR No. 12/2021 against them to be quashed by the CID PS, A.P., Amaravathi, Mangalagiri, which was filed under Sections 124A, 153A, 505 r/w 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
• According to TV5, the FIR was filed as a result of the channel broadcasting Raju's speeches. According to the ABN petition, the “ABN Andhrajyothi” channel has been “targeted by the State Government and its broadcasting was stopped at the ruling party/State Government's behest, forcing it to approach the Hon'ble TDSAT and despite the order, access to the petitioners' channel is limited in Andhra Pradesh” since the Reddy-led government came to power.
• Senior Advocates Shyam Divan and Sidharth Luthra, who appeared on their behalf, said that the FIR is an attempt to silence the electronic media and an affront to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. They argued that the charges in the FIR do not demonstrate any violations of the laws that have been used against them.

Court’s Observation

• We believe that the scope and parameters of Sections 124A, 153A, and 505 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 would require interpretation, particularly in the context of the right of electronic and print media to communicate news, information, and rights, even those that may be critical of the government.
• Apart from claiming that the FIR fails to prove the Petitioners' guilt, it has also been claimed that the Petitioners have been forced to go to the Supreme Court because the YSR MP was allegedly arrested in connection with the impugned FIR and subjected to custodial torture at the hands of the Respondent authorities.
• It should be mentioned that Krishnam Raju was just granted bail by the Supreme Court. The pleas claim that the only charge levelled against the Petitioners channel in the impugned FIR is that they assigned "premeditated" and "arranged" slots to Mr Raju, which, according to the impugned FIR, demonstrates a meeting of minds among the accused people.
• The petition also claims that the impugned FIR's goal to criminalise the act of exposing the opinions of a sitting MP who is a public figure manifestly violates the Petitioner's right to freedom of speech and expression, as well as having a chilling effect on media outlets in the State.
• The Supreme Court granted Raju bail after he was arrested in the case. He claims he was tortured in third-degree while in police detention and has petitioned the Supreme Court for a CBI investigation.

Sedition Laws in India

• In recent months, sedition laws have been used against journalists in areas as different as Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Manipur. What one television station wrote in their petition exemplifies why the media is being targeted by this and other draconian laws: “The FIR's goal is to create a chilling effect for news outlets... so that no news outlet would host any content that is critical of the Government... The Government seeks to muzzle critics and the press.”
• It's worth noting how closely this mirrors the situation in 1922 when Gandhi was prosecuted with sedition by the British and famously stated that the law was the prince among political parts of the IPC designed to restrict a citizen's liberty. The evidence of how Section 124A is abused has piled up in the following years, despite repeated judicial clarifications that "commenting in strong words about the measures or conduct of government or its agents" does not constitute sedition.
• A free press is democracy's lifeblood. Consider how, in the last year and a half, journalists have pushed governments to do better and be better by giving voice to citizens' pain - whether it's migrant labourers forced to traverse the length of states, patients eager for a hospital bed, or young workers scurrying for immunizations.
• While these voices may not be pleasant to the ears of any government, they are essential for accountability and better governance. Their liberty is also inextricably linked to the enjoyment of other fundamental rights by Indian citizens.

What do you think about this case?