INTRODUCTION
Hon’ble Justice Arun Monga of Rajasthan High Court, on 16th December, 2024, said that genuine and reasonable dissent should not be treated for sedition or any acts against the nation, and also dismissed the FIR filed against Sikh preacher Tejender Pal Singh Timma. He was charged under Sections 152 and 197(1)(c) of the BNS for allegedly jeopardizing the unity and sovereignty of India through posts on social media platform. The court went through the audio-visual recording related to the case and noted that, although the speech was critical of the government, it did not possess the required intent that is (mens rea) to qualify as an offense under Section 152 and Section 197 of BNS. The judge also observed that to invoke such criminal provisions, there must be a clear and immediate link between the speech and the potential for rebellion or war against national security.
BACKGROUND
A complaint was filed by Lakhvinder Singh, who claimed that Tajender Pal Singh Timma had shared a post on Facebook and WhatsApp that indicated support for a Member of Parliament named Amritpal Singh, who is in judicial custody right now. The complainant alleged that Tajender was promoting the Khalistan movement, inciting public disorder and unrest.
Tajender was charged under Section 152 of the BNS, which criminalizes actions that danger the sovereignty and unity of India, and a punishment of life imprisonment or a jail term of up to seven years, along with a fine is mentioned for committing such an act or crime. And he was also charged of Section 197 of BNS, which deals with action that harm national integrity, such as security of nation, unity and sovereignty.
KEY ASPECTS
- Rajasthan High Court observed that legitimate dissent or criticism cannot be called as sedition or anti-national act.
- The court said that Section 152 of new criminal law BNS that is Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita should not be treated as Section 124A of IPC that is Indian Penal Code, because the criminal law that is BNS deals with actions endangering the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India and that is what section 152 of the BNS talks about whereas the old criminal law that is Section 124A of the IPC was dealing with acts against the Government.
- The court says mere criticism against the government should not be treated as a criminal offence and Section 152 should not be misused against such a dissent.
- The court promoted the right to dissent against the government, and stated Section 152 talks about anything which is against the national unity, sovereignty and integrity of the nation.
CONCLUSION
The Rajasthan High Court ruled that just dissent should not be criminalized as an acts against the nation. The court dismissed the FIR filed against Sikh preacher Tejender Pal Singh Timma, who had been charged under Sections 152 and 197(1)(c) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for allegedly damaging India’s sovereignty and unity through social media posts. The court concluded that there must be a clear direct link between speech and the potential for rebellion or threats to national security to justify such charges. And gave the judgement in favour of the accused and freed him of such charges.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in array od sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firms, best lawyers, best family lawyers, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer,”
WRITTEN BY SALIL GAURAV
