Akhil Gogoi moves Supreme Court challenging offences similar to sedition; flags criminalisation of speeches critical of government

Assam peasant leader and Sibsagar MLA Akhil Gogoi moved the Supreme Court on Monday challenging the constitutional validity of sedition as well as related offences that criminalises political speech critical of government and its policies..Gogoi prayed that all criminal proceedings pending in courts across the country relating to the charge of sedition under Section 124A of Indian Penal Code (IPC) be closed.He said that the directions issued by the Supreme Court in May 2022 barring registration of sedition cases should also apply to other similar offences.Gogoi also prayed that Section 124A and other related offences that employ the same logic of sedition should be struck down as violative of freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. Pertinently, the petitioner sought a declaration by the Court that criminalising political speeches critical of government acts and policies is violative of Article 19(1)(a). "It is the Petitioner’s submission that the offence of sedition, as also the logic of the offence of sedition, is vulnerable to judicial review. When the logic of sedition is transplanted into other sections that also form a constitutional breach in the same manner is subject to the same constitutional safeguards .The Petitioner seeks to challenge the vires of criminalizing ‘political and speech acts’, however critical of the Government and its policies," the plea said. .Gogoi's plea, filed through advocate Ivo Manuel Simon D'Costa, said that the pending cases against him in connection with his speeches and calls for bandhs during the anti-CAA protests in Assam have been 'bolstered' by adding sedition-like offences to the chargesheet.He contended that the same cannot be sustained as other offences alleging he is part of a sinister conspiracy are effectively curtailing his constitutional right to criticise the government and its policies."The petitioner is accused of ‘speech offences’ which are in the nature of political acts of critique, covered squarely within Section 124A of the IPC ... the Ld. Trial Court ought not to proceed with the framing of charges under Section 124A of the IPC and related offences that adopt the logic of sedition, pending adjudication of the constitutional validity of the said offences by this Hon’ble Court," the plea stated..Therefore, criminalising of political speeches and acts is inconsistent with the fundamental rights to freedom of speech and expression, personal liberty and equality before the law, it was submitted.Gogoi, therefore, sought issuance of following directions:- Declare the offence of sedition void and inoperative for being ultra vires Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India read with Articles 14 and 21; - Declare that all subsisting criminal proceedings before any court to the extent of such proceedings in anyway relate to a charge under Section 124A of the IPC stand closed to such extent;- Offences related to sedition that employ exactly the same logic of sedition also be deemed ultra vires Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India read with Articles 14 and 21..Gogoi and three others have been booked for the offences in relation to December 2019 protests and speeches against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and alleged links to Maoist organisations.They were charged under various provisions of Unlawful Prevention Activities Act (UAPA) and for Sedition (section 124A), promoting enmity between religious groups (section 153A) and 153B (Statement against national integration) under the Indian Penal Code.A special NIA court in Guwahati had in July 2021 discharged Gogoi of all the charges against him.The special court had gone on to the extent of stating that the speeches made by Gogoi far from inciting violence, in fact exhorted people not to resort to violence.The Gauhati High Court had, however, overturned this verdict on February 9 this year, stating that the special Court had 'travelled way beyond the level of sifting of evidence' permissible at the stage of framing charges, and its order read like that of an acquittal than discharge..The top court had recently bail to Gogoi in the matter but refused to discharge him. The case as on date stands remitted to the trial court at the stage of framing of charges afresh.