|  |  | 

India Top Headlines

Non-seditious government expression of dissenting opinion: Supreme Court | India News

img-responsive

NEW DELHI: Noting that the expression of an opinion dissenting from a decision taken by the central government itself cannot be considered seditious, the Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a PIL seeking an action against the president of the National Conference, Farooq Abdullah, for their comments on the repeal of Article 370 of the Constitution.
A court of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hemant Gupta rejected the statement and also fined the petitioners 50,000 rupees for making such claims and ordered them to deposit the amount in the Supreme Court Defenders Welfare Fund in a within four weeks.
“It cannot be said that the expression of a dissenting opinion of a decision taken by the Central Government itself is seditious. There is nothing in the declaration that seems so offensive to us as to give a motive for action for a Court to initiate a procedure.
“Not only that, the petitioners have nothing to do with the issue and this is clearly a publicity interest litigation case for the petitioners just to get their names in the press. We must discourage such efforts,” the court said.
The higher court was hearing a statement referring to his statement on the restoration of article 370, which granted special status to Jammu and Kashmir, and held that it clearly amounts to a seditious act and therefore can be punished under of section 124-A of the law. CPI.
The petition filed by Rajat Sharma and Dr. Neh Srivastava, both belonging to Sardar Patel’s Vishwa Guru India Vision organization, alleged that the former chief minister was trying to “deliver” Kashmir to China and should therefore be prosecuted. by sedition.
“Mr. Farooq Abdullah has committed a crime punishable under article 124-A of the Indian Penal Code. As he has made the live statement that to restore article 370 he would take help from China, which clearly amounts to an act seditious and therefore liable to be punished under section 124-A of the IPC, “the statement read.
The petitioners also referred to a statement made by BJP spokesman Sambit Patra to claim that Abdullah is misleading the people of Jammu and Kashmir into joining China in restoring article 370 of the Constitution.

Reference page

non-seditious-government-expression-of-dissenting-opinion-supreme-court-india-news

ABOUT THE AUTHOR