Sedition - Overview, Structure, Properties & Uses

Sedition in Criminal Law

Edited By Ritika Jonwal | Updated on Jul 02, 2025 06:07 PM IST

Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code 1860 deals with Sedition as an offence. Under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution, every citizen has the right to free speech and the expression of their opinions. Article 19(2) provides appropriate limitations on the freedom of speech and expression, so this freedom is not unrestricted. However, acts, words, signs, or representations that are thought to be contemptuous of the Indian government are punishable under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code. Sedition is the legal term for speech that is considered to be hostile or disloyal to the state. Section 124A is a broad law that includes defamation of the government, but does not extend to criticism of specific administrative actions or measures made in good faith.

This Story also Contains

Sedition Law of India
History of Sedition Law
Activities that are Seditious in Nature
Importance of Sedition Law in India
Constitutional Validity of Sedition Laws
Defences Available to a Person With Sedition
Problems with Sedition Law in India
Case Laws on Sedition in Criminal Law
Conclusion

Sedition

Sedition Law of India

According to Section 124 A IPC, sedition is defined as any act that causes or attempts to cause hatred or contempt for the legally established Indian government, or that excites or attempts to excite dissatisfaction toward it. Life in prison with the possibility of an additional fine or up to three years in jail are among the possible sentences.

History of Sedition Law

British MPs tried to suppress the Indian press's anti-British agenda by passing sedition legislation. Thomas Macaulay wrote it first in 1837, but it was removed when the Indian Penal Code was passed in 1860. Nonetheless, Sir James Stephen's modification to the IPC in 1870 added section 124 A. As a result, sedition was made illegal under section 124A of the IPC by special Act XVII of 1870. The law of sedition was also mentioned in the Defence of India Rules and the Press (Emergency Powers) Act of 1931, both of which have since been repealed. During the 19th and 20th centuries, a few prominent sedition cases involved Indian nationalist leaders. The first trial included Jogendra Chandra Bose, the editor of the Bangobasi newspaper in 1891. In addition, two significant historical trials to date include the trials of Mahatma Gandhi in 1922 and Bal Gangadhar Tilak in 1909. Gandhi and Shankerlal, the banker and owner of Young India, were charged for three pieces that appeared in the weekly.

Activities that are Seditious in Nature

The definition of "sedition" is a contentious issue in India. As per the Indian Penal Code, an act is said to be "seditious" if it possesses the following elements:

Any written or spoken words, as well as signs like placards and banners (visual representation)
Must provoke enmity, scorn, or disrespect for the Government of India
must bring about "imminent violence" or disturbance in the neighbourhood.

According to the Court's interpretation of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 124-A, the following behaviour is considered "seditious."

Groups shouting slogans against the government, like "Khalistan Zindabad." Slogans raised once or twice in passing were deemed to be non-seditious.
For a speech to be deemed seditious, it must encourage violence or public disturbance. It has been further interpreted in later judgments to encompass "incitement of imminent violence."
Any literary work that encourages unrest and violence in public.

Importance of Sedition Law in India

The Indian Penal Code's Section 124A can help suppress terrorist, separatist, and anti-national groups.
It protects the elected government from attempts to topple it violently and illegally. One of the main requirements for the stability of the State is the continued presence of the legal administration.
If a court's contempt demands punishment, then a government's contempt must likewise carry a penalty.
There are Maoist insurgencies in numerous parts of several states, and rebel groups virtually run a parallel administration. These groups blatantly advocate for overthrowing the state government by revolution. Given this, it would be absurd to eliminate Section 124A based only on a few well-publicized cases of misuse.

You may also read

Constitutional Validity of Sedition Laws

The idea of free speech has gained international recognition, and everyone agrees that it is a fundamental human right. These rights are guaranteed in India by Article 19 and Part III of the Indian Constitution. Geographical boundaries cannot limit the aforementioned right because it is everyone's right to freely exchange ideas and viewpoints with others inside and outside of India.

The debate concerning the legality of India's section 124 IPC 1860 sedition statute revolves around whether, when argued against, it breaches Article 19(1) and, when argued in favour of, it is compliant with Article 19(2). A law on Article 19 must, among other things, not be arbitrary and any limitations or restrictions placed on rights under Article 19(1)(a) must adhere to the reasonable constraints listed in Article 19(2). Let's examine each in more detail.

The authority to guarantee and defend citizens' rights has been granted to courts. The "freedom of speech and expression" is guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a), however, it is subject to restrictions outlined in Article 19(2), which specifies when a legislator may restrict this right.

Therefore, the question that needs to be addressed right now is whether or not Article 19(1)(a) and the 124A section of the IPC contradict. This is considered to be reflected in the following points:

The IPC's Section 124A is unconstitutional because it violates Article 19(1)(a)'s fundamental right to free speech and isn't justified by the phrase "in the interest of public order."
Section 124A is not invalid since the phrase "in the interests of public order" has a broader meaning and shouldn't be limited to a single facet of public order.
Section 124A IPC is not entirely void, although it does have some validity. In the case of Indramani Singh v. State of Manipur, it was determined that although Section 124A, which forbids just expressing displeasure, is supra vires, the restrictions placed on the right to free speech and expression under Article 19(2) may be deemed intra vires.

In 1959, the Allahabad Supreme Court declared that Section 124A violated Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

Defences Available to a Person With Sedition

To get an exemption from criminal liability, one may raise the following defences:

that he did not perform the relevant act, speak the words, write the sign, or create the representation.
He did not attempt to show disdain or contempt.
The government should not be the object of such dissatisfaction.

Problems with Sedition Law in India

Being a holdover from colonialism, Section 124A is inappropriate for a democratic society. It is a restriction on the rightful use of the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by the Constitution.
Dissent and criticism of the government play a vital role in a vibrant public conversation in a democracy. They cannot be contrived to appear as sedition.
It is essential to democracy to be able to question, criticize, and choose new leaders.
The British have abolished the law in their own country, having imposed sedition as a means of suppressing Indians. India has no justification for keeping this part in place.
The terms used under Section 124A, such as "disaffection," are vague and open to different interpretations based on the whims and caprices of the investigators.
Provisions in the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act 2019 and the Indian Penal Code penalise "overthrowing the administration with brutality and unlawful means" and "disturbing the public order." These are sufficient to protect the integrity of the country.
The misuse of the sedition act is victimising political dissension. Executive discretion is inherently broad and focused, which makes clear misuse possible.
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) was ratified by India in 1979. Internationally accepted standards for protecting the right to free speech are established by the ICCPR. On the other hand, mishandling sedition and hurriedly filing accusations are at odds with India's international obligations.

Case Laws on Sedition in Criminal Law

In the case of, Kedarnath Singh v. State of Bihar

In this case, it was held that The law, which is constitutional, applied to statements made or published with the implied purpose of violently overthrowing the government. As long as they are not encouraging violence against the government, citizens are free to criticize it to cause chaos in the community. The Supreme Court maintained the constitutionality of Section 124A, limiting its scope to actions that have the intent or propensity to cause chaos, disrupt the peace, or encourage violence.

In the case of Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras

In this case, In front of the Supreme Court, the petitioner argued that the Madras State's decree prohibiting his paper "Cross Roads" was unlawful. Article 19(1) of the Constitution grants him the right to speech and expression, and this has been violated. According to the Supreme Court, limitations under Article 19(2) should only be implemented in situations where the safety of the general public is in jeopardy. Situations where this kind of conundrum might not arise are neither constitutional nor legitimate. The Supreme Court upheld the petitioner's claim under Article 32 of the Constitution and reversed the Madras State order.

Conclusion

Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution establishes the rights to speech and expression. Sedition is a crime in India covered by Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code 1860. The offence of sedition violates Article 19 of the Constitution of India. In the offence of sedition, efforts are made by the offender to bring dissatisfaction against the Government. The punishment for sedition is imprisonment for three years and a fine.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. What is sedition in crime?

According to this, inciting hatred or disdain for the legally established Indian government is considered sedition. In this instance, the sentence consists of either three years in prison and a financial penalty or life in prison and a financial penalty.

2. What does Seditious mean?

Sedition is done to convince others to reject their government.

3. What is section 124 of IPC?

Section 124 provides for the punishment of anyone who assaults, wrongfully restrains, attempts to wrongfully restrain, overawes, or threatens to use criminal force or the threat of using criminal force against the President of India or the Governor of any State to coerce them into exercising or refraining from exercising any of their legitimate powers.

4. What are the exceptions for Sedition?

To get an exemption from criminal liability, one may raise the following defences: that he did not perform the relevant act, speak the words, write the sign, or create the representation. He did not attempt to show disdain or contempt.

5. Is sedition bailable?

Sedition is a non-bailable offence and the punishment for the offence of sedition is imprisonment for up to three years to a life term, and a fine or both.

6. What are some common elements of sedition laws?

Common elements of sedition laws often include: 1) Intent to cause disaffection against the government, 2) Incitement of violence or public disorder, 3) Promotion of feelings of enmity or hatred between different groups, and 4) Attempts to bring the government into contempt or hatred.

7. Can written materials be considered seditious?

Yes, written materials can be considered seditious if they are intended to incite rebellion or resistance against the government. This can include books, pamphlets, articles, or even social media posts that encourage unlawful opposition to state authority.

8. Can sedition be committed through online activities?

Yes, sedition can be committed through online activities. In the digital age, social media posts, online articles, or other internet-based communications that incite rebellion or resistance against the government could potentially be considered seditious, depending on the specific laws of the country.

9. What is the relationship between sedition and civil disobedience?

While both sedition and civil disobedience involve opposition to government authority, they differ in intent and method. Civil disobedience typically involves peacefully breaking specific laws to draw attention to their perceived injustice, while sedition involves inciting broader rebellion against the government itself.

10. What is the difference between sedition and subversion?

While both concepts involve opposition to state authority, sedition typically refers to inciting others to rebel against the government, while subversion involves attempts to secretly undermine or overthrow the established political system, often through gradual means rather than open rebellion.

11. What is the burden of proof in sedition cases?

The burden of proof in sedition cases typically lies with the prosecution. They must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused intended to incite rebellion or resistance against the government. This often involves demonstrating both the act itself and the intent behind it.

12. How does sedition differ from treason?

While both sedition and treason involve acts against the state, they differ in severity and intent. Treason typically involves actively betraying one's country, such as by aiding an enemy during wartime. Sedition, on the other hand, generally involves inciting opposition or resistance to the government without necessarily engaging in overtly treasonous acts.

13. How does the concept of sedition relate to freedom of speech?

The relationship between sedition and freedom of speech is often contentious. While many countries protect freedom of speech, sedition laws can limit this right when speech is deemed to threaten national security or public order. This balance is frequently debated and varies across different legal systems.

14. What is the difference between sedition and seditious conspiracy?

Sedition generally refers to individual acts or speech against the government, while seditious conspiracy involves two or more people working together to oppose or overthrow the government through force. Seditious conspiracy is typically considered a more serious offense.

15. Can peaceful protest be considered sedition?

Generally, peaceful protest is not considered sedition in most democratic countries. Sedition typically requires an element of inciting violence or unlawful actions against the government. However, the line can become blurred if protests are seen as encouraging widespread civil disobedience or resistance to law enforcement.

16. How has the interpretation of sedition laws evolved over time?

The interpretation of sedition laws has generally evolved towards a more narrow application in many democracies. Courts often interpret these laws in light of constitutional protections for free speech and political dissent, requiring a higher threshold of proof and clearer evidence of intent to incite unlawful actions.

17. What is the significance of the "clear and present danger" test in relation to sedition?

The "clear and present danger" test, originating in U.S. jurisprudence, is often applied in sedition cases. It suggests that speech can only be restricted if it presents a clear and imminent threat of substantive evil. This test raises the bar for prosecuting sedition, requiring more than mere advocacy of abstract doctrines.

18. Can sedition charges be brought against media organizations?

In some jurisdictions, sedition charges can potentially be brought against media organizations if they are accused of deliberately publishing content that incites rebellion or resistance against the government. However, this is controversial and often conflicts with principles of press freedom.

19. Can sedition laws be applied retroactively?

Generally, the principle of non-retroactivity in criminal law means that sedition laws should not be applied to acts committed before the law was enacted. However, the application of this principle can vary depending on the jurisdiction and the specific circumstances of the case.

20. How do sedition laws impact political activism?

Sedition laws can have a chilling effect on political activism by potentially criminalizing certain forms of dissent. This can lead activists to self-censor or avoid certain types of political expression out of fear of prosecution, potentially limiting robust political debate and opposition.

21. What defenses are typically available in sedition cases?

Common defenses in sedition cases may include: 1) Lack of intent to incite rebellion, 2) Constitutional protections of free speech, 3) Arguing that the speech or actions were legitimate political discourse, not sedition, and 4) Challenging the law itself as unconstitutional or overly broad.

22. How does the intent of the accused factor into sedition charges?

Intent is crucial in sedition cases. The prosecution typically needs to prove that the accused intended to incite rebellion or resistance against the government, not just that their actions or words had that effect. This focus on intent helps distinguish between seditious acts and protected forms of political expression.

23. What is the role of context in determining whether an act is seditious?

Context plays a crucial role in determining whether an act is seditious. Factors such as the political climate, the specific words used, the audience, and the potential consequences of the act are all considered. What might be deemed seditious in one context could be considered protected speech in another.

24. Can sedition be committed unintentionally?

In most jurisdictions, sedition requires intent. However, the question of unintentional sedition can arise in cases where someone's words or actions inadvertently incite rebellion. The specific handling of such cases would depend on the exact wording of the law and its interpretation by the courts.

25. How do sedition laws interact with laws protecting whistleblowers?

The interaction between sedition laws and whistleblower protections can be complex. While whistleblower laws aim to protect those who expose wrongdoing, if the exposure is seen as inciting rebellion against the government, it could potentially fall under sedition. This tension often requires careful legal balancing.

26. What is the historical context of sedition laws?

Sedition laws have roots in monarchical systems where criticizing the ruler was considered a serious offense. They were often used to suppress political dissent. In the modern era, their application and interpretation have evolved, particularly in democratic societies that value free speech and political opposition.

27. What is the role of historical context in interpreting sedition laws?

Historical context plays a crucial role in interpreting sedition laws. Many such laws were created in specific historical circumstances, such as wartime or periods of political unrest. Courts often consider this historical context when interpreting these laws in modern settings, sometimes leading to narrower applications.

28. How do sedition laws vary across different countries?

Sedition laws can vary significantly across countries. Some nations have strict sedition laws that are actively enforced, while others have repealed such laws or interpret them narrowly. The variation often reflects differences in political systems, historical contexts, and attitudes towards free speech and dissent.

29. What is the significance of the "marketplace of ideas" concept in relation to sedition laws?

The "marketplace of ideas" concept, which suggests that truth emerges from the competition of ideas in free, transparent public discourse, is often invoked in debates about sedition laws. Proponents argue that this concept supports limiting or abolishing sedition laws to allow for freer political discourse.

30. What is the role of public opinion in shaping the application of sedition laws?

Public opinion can play a significant role in shaping how sedition laws are applied and interpreted. Strong public sentiment against the use of these laws can influence prosecutorial discretion and even lead to legislative changes. Conversely, public fear during times of unrest might lead to stricter application of these laws.

31. How do sedition laws apply to non-citizens?

Sedition laws typically apply to both citizens and non-citizens within a country's jurisdiction. However, the application to non-citizens, especially those not residing in the country, can raise complex legal and diplomatic issues, particularly in cases involving international media or foreign political activists.

32. What is the relationship between sedition and hate speech laws?

While sedition and hate speech laws both restrict certain forms of expression, they have different focuses. Sedition laws target speech that incites rebellion against the government, while hate speech laws typically address speech that promotes discrimination or violence against specific groups based on protected characteristics.

33. How do sedition laws interact with international human rights law?

The application of sedition laws can sometimes conflict with international human rights standards, particularly those protecting freedom of expression. International bodies often encourage states to ensure that any restrictions on speech, including those related to sedition, meet strict tests of necessity and proportionality.

34. How do sedition laws apply to symbolic acts of protest?

The application of sedition laws to symbolic acts of protest can be complex. While many forms of symbolic protest are protected as free speech, acts that are interpreted as inciting rebellion against the government could potentially fall under sedition laws, depending on their nature and context.

35. How do sedition laws interact with academic freedom?

The interaction between sedition laws and academic freedom can be contentious. While academic freedom generally protects the right to research and discuss controversial topics, including critiques of government, sedition laws could potentially be applied if academic work is seen as inciting rebellion. This tension often requires careful balancing.

36. Is criticizing the government considered sedition?

Not necessarily. In many democratic countries, criticizing the government is protected as free speech. Sedition typically requires more than mere criticism; it usually involves actively encouraging others to rebel against or resist the government's authority through unlawful means.

37. What are some criticisms of sedition laws?

Common criticisms of sedition laws include: 1) They can be used to suppress legitimate political dissent, 2) They may infringe on freedom of speech, 3) The vague nature of some sedition laws can lead to arbitrary enforcement, and 4) They may be unnecessary in modern democracies with other laws addressing public order and national security.

38. What is the relationship between sedition and national security?

Sedition laws are often justified on national security grounds, with the argument that they help prevent internal threats to the state. However, critics argue that broad sedition laws can actually harm national security by suppressing legitimate dissent and eroding public trust in government institutions.

39. How do modern democracies typically view sedition laws?

Many modern democracies view traditional sedition laws as potentially incompatible with principles of free speech and democratic dissent. Some countries have repealed or narrowed their sedition laws, while others maintain them but apply them sparingly or reinterpret them in light of constitutional protections.

40. What is the difference between sedition and insurrection?

While both involve opposition to government authority, sedition typically refers to inciting or encouraging others to rebel, while insurrection involves actively participating in a rebellion or uprising against the government. Insurrection is generally considered a more serious and direct threat to state authority.

41. What is sedition in criminal law?

Sedition in criminal law refers to conduct or speech that incites rebellion or resistance against the established authority of a state or government. It typically involves actions or words that aim to overthrow, undermine, or challenge the legitimacy of the government.

42. How do sedition laws apply in federal systems with multiple levels of government?

In federal systems, sedition laws may exist at both federal and state/provincial levels, potentially leading to complex jurisdictional issues. The application of these laws may vary depending on whether the alleged seditious act targets the federal government or a state/provincial government.

43. Can corporations be charged with sedition?

In some jurisdictions, corporations can potentially be charged with crimes, including sedition, if their actions as an entity are deemed to incite rebellion against the government. However, this is relatively rare and would depend on the specific laws of the jurisdiction and the nature of the corporation's actions.

44. What is the role of public interest in sedition cases?

Public interest considerations can play a significant role in sedition cases. Courts may consider whether the alleged seditious act served a legitimate public interest, such as exposing government corruption. Some jurisdictions explicitly include public interest defenses in their sedition laws.

45. What is the relationship between sedition and espionage?

While both sedition and espionage involve actions against the state, they differ in focus. Sedition typically involves inciting internal rebellion, while espionage involves gathering secret information, often for a foreign power. However, in some cases, the lines between these offenses can blur.

46. How do sedition laws impact international relations?

Sedition laws can impact international relations, particularly when applied to foreign nationals or to speech originating in other countries. The prosecution of foreign journalists or activists under sedition laws can lead to diplomatic tensions and debates about jurisdiction and free speech across borders.

47. What is the role of intent in distinguishing between sedition and legitimate political opposition?

Intent plays a crucial role in distinguishing sedition from legitimate political opposition. While opposition parties may strongly criticize the government, sedition typically requires an intent to incite rebellion or resistance through unlawful means. The challenge often lies in proving this intent in court.

48. How do sedition laws apply to religious speech?

The application of sedition laws to religious speech can be particularly sensitive. While religious freedom is generally protected, if religious speech is deemed to incite rebellion against the government, it could potentially fall under sedition laws. This intersection often requires careful legal and constitutional analysis.

49. What is the relationship between sedition and national symbols?

Acts involving national symbols, such as flag burning, can sometimes be charged as sedition if they are seen as inciting rebellion against the state. However, in many democracies, such acts are often protected as forms of political expression, highlighting the tension between sedition laws and free speech rights.

50. How do sedition laws impact journalism and press freedom?

Sedition laws can have a significant impact on journalism and press freedom. They may discourage investigative reporting or critical coverage of government actions out of fear of prosecution. This tension between sedition laws and press freedom is a frequent subject of debate in media law and policy.

51. How do sedition laws interact with laws protecting cultural expression?

The interaction between sedition laws and cultural expression can be complex. While cultural expressions, including art and literature, are generally protected, works that are interpreted as inciting rebellion against the state could potentially fall under sedition laws. This intersection often requires careful legal analysis.

52. What is the relationship between sedition and cyber laws?

As digital communication becomes more prevalent, the intersection of sedition and cyber laws is increasingly important. Online activities that incite rebellion against the government could potentially be prosecuted under both sedition and cyber crime laws, raising new legal questions about jurisdiction and digital rights.

53. How do sedition laws impact political satire and comedy?

The application of sedition laws to political satire and comedy can be contentious. While such forms of expression are often protected as free speech, particularly biting or inflammatory satire could potentially be interpreted as seditious if it's seen as inciting rebellion. This highlights the sometimes blurry line between protected speech and sedition.

54. How do sedition laws interact with international law principles of state sovereignty?

Sedition laws are often justified on grounds of protecting state sovereignty. However, their application, particularly to foreign nationals or to speech originating abroad, can raise complex questions about the limits of state sovereignty in an interconnected world, especially when they conflict with international human rights norms.

55. What is the future of sedition laws in an increasingly globalized and digital world?

The future of sedition laws is a subject of ongoing debate. As the world becomes more interconnected and digital communication transcends national boundaries, traditional concepts of sedition may need to be reevaluated. Some argue for their abolition, while others advocate for their modernization to address new forms of threats to state stability in the digital age.