 "It might be unpatriotic, but it certainly isn't sedition: Raian Karanjawala")
After a group of Kashmiri students from a private university in Meerut cheered for Pakistan in an Asia Cup match, they were charged with sedition (Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code), promoting enmity between different groups (Section 153 A) and mischief (Section 427) on March 6. Around 67 students of Kashmiri origin were suspended from the university for three days. Later, following pressure from Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah and other groups, the Uttar Pradesh government decided to withdraw the sedition charge. Raian Karanjawala, managing partner of legal firm Karanjawala & Co, discusses the case, the law of sedition and its application with Ranjita Ganesan
Was the initial charge of sedition justified in this case?
In my view, the charge of sedition clearly does not apply in this case. You may be unpatriotic if you cheer for a country other than your own, but it does not make a case for sedition. The case of sedition is only made out if in the course of a speech, you incite people to violence.
This was a cricket match. Would it be seen as sedition had the opponent they were cheering for been Australia or England? Or is it being applied selectively here because of the context and history of dispute?
Whether it was an India-Pakistan match or an India-Australia match or a match against England, cheering for one side or another cannot bring the charge of sedition. It makes no difference who the opponent is.
What qualifies as sedition and typically, in which situation would one be charged with it?
As I have said earlier, if you make a speech inciting people to violence against the state, that would be a case for sedition.
The other charges the students face are 153 A (promoting enmity between different groups) and 427 (mischief). Are these fair in this case?
I think at the end of the day, the state government will find it difficult to make even these charges stick against the people concerned. Frankly, it is unpatriotic to support and cheer for a country that is hostile to your own. It is seen as batting outside the crease but does not violate the law.
Also, do you think the expulsion of the 60 students for three days is fair punishment?
I haven’t really got the full facts of the situation before me. My first reaction is that it is not fair.
Was the initial charge of sedition justified in this case?
In my view, the charge of sedition clearly does not apply in this case. You may be unpatriotic if you cheer for a country other than your own, but it does not make a case for sedition. The case of sedition is only made out if in the course of a speech, you incite people to violence.
This was a cricket match. Would it be seen as sedition had the opponent they were cheering for been Australia or England? Or is it being applied selectively here because of the context and history of dispute?
Whether it was an India-Pakistan match or an India-Australia match or a match against England, cheering for one side or another cannot bring the charge of sedition. It makes no difference who the opponent is.
More From This Section
What qualifies as sedition and typically, in which situation would one be charged with it?
As I have said earlier, if you make a speech inciting people to violence against the state, that would be a case for sedition.
The other charges the students face are 153 A (promoting enmity between different groups) and 427 (mischief). Are these fair in this case?
I think at the end of the day, the state government will find it difficult to make even these charges stick against the people concerned. Frankly, it is unpatriotic to support and cheer for a country that is hostile to your own. It is seen as batting outside the crease but does not violate the law.
Also, do you think the expulsion of the 60 students for three days is fair punishment?
I haven’t really got the full facts of the situation before me. My first reaction is that it is not fair.