Four years after putting on hold sedition law, SC says trials can proceed if accused has no objection

After keeping hearings of sedition cases in courts across the country for four years, the Supreme Court on Thursday (May 21, 2026) said that if the accused has no objection, the courts can proceed with cases and appeals involving the offense of sedition under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The statement was issued by a Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi while hearing the plea of ​​a petitioner who was imprisoned for 17 years in a case involving sedition charges.

“The complaint of the petitioner is that he has no objection if his criminal objection is heard in its entirety, including the charge under Section 124A. We, therefore, clarify that… if the accused has no objection to the continuation of the trial, appeal or any other proceeding in which he has filed a criminal complaint under Section 124A IPC, there will be no impediment for the courts to decide such matters on merits and in accordance with law,” the bench said.

In an interim order issued on May 11, 2022, the high court postponed hearings in sedition cases pending in the courts until the government completes its promised exercise of “re-examining and re-evaluating” colonial-era provisions.

The court had also made it clear that it “hopes and expects” that the Center and the States will refrain from registering FIRs, pursuing investigations or taking coercive measures under Section 124A while the “re-evaluation” of the provision is ongoing.

A Bench chaired by the then Chief Justice of India NV Ramana had also observed that while being conscious of the “security interests and integrity of the state on the one hand” and the “civil liberties of the citizens” on the other, there was an obligation to “balance” both considerations.

In the present case, the Bench directed the Madhya Pradesh High Court to immediately consider the petitioner’s appeal along with relevant issues and decide on merits.

The petitioner had been convicted by a court in 2017 on charges including sedition, inciting hostility under the IPC, offenses under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and the Arms Act, 1959. He has been lodged in a central jail in Bhopal since then.

In February, Chief Justice Kant had orally observed that the Union government’s decision to consider the offense of sedition under the erstwhile IPC could not prevent Parliament from reintroducing a similar provision in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) as the legislature functions independently of the executive.

This observation had come while the court was hearing a batch of public interest litigation challenging various provisions of the BNS, including Section 152, which criminalises acts deemed to endanger the sovereignty, unity and integrity of the country. The petitioners had argued that this section was a “repackaged” version of the colonial-era sedition law.

“Although the language has been changed, its essential content remains the same or has been expanded further, criminalizing vague and broad categories of speech and expression such as ‘subversive activity’, ‘promoting separatist sentiments’ and acts ‘endangering the unity or integrity of India’,” the petition said.