Tuesday Brief

In recent times, you all must have heard about  Article 35A,  Section 66A, and section 124A,  There has been widespread discussion on these laws. Two of have them have been scrapped by the govt, but section 124A is still there. People are agitating against this also and they want govt to scrap this also. Now let us see  what these laws are about:

 

Article 35A

It was a provision incorporated in the constitution giving the J & K legislature to decide who all are permanent residents of the state and confer then special rights and privileges in public sector jobs, acquisition of property in the state, scholarships, and other public aid. This provision mandated that no act of legislature coming under it can be challenged for violating the law of land.

It was incorporated into the constitution in 1954, and the President order was issued under Article 370, which allowed the President to make certain exceptions and modifications, for state subjects of J & K.

As 370 was incorporated into the constitution by ordinance and not approved by any parliament, both 370 and 35A were scrapped by ordinance by the present NDA govt, which was later passed by both houses of Parliament. Now subjects of  J & K will be governed by the Indian Constitution. This also means that people who are staying there without permanent residency in the state will also get all the facilities provided by the state, and another thing is now people from anywhere in the country can buy property in J & K.

Section 66A

It made sending offensive messages using a computer or any other communication devices a crime. The police had to determine whether the information sent in the message qualified as offensive or not.

To be booked under Section 66A, the information in the message had to be:

• Grossly offensive
• False and meant for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred, or ill will
• Meant to deceive or mislead the recipient about the origin of such messages

The crime was punishable with three-year jail and a fine.

The IT Act was enacted in 2000 when the Internet was still relatively new in India. Social media websites were not in vogue. Smartphone mobile apps were not the order of the day.

 

As they gained popularity in India, misuse, and abuse of the platforms came up as a challenge to the government. As a result, Section 66A was inserted into the IT Act in 2009.

The explosion of social media since then, however, made volumes of posts or messages “grossly offensive”. A number of complaints reached police stations, and many were booked and arrested.

 

However, recently it was so happening that Police use to arrest anyone under this section that person’s message contains something which is not liked by some influential person or the govt. Most of these cases were on flimsy grounds. A few months back Supreme Court directed the govt to repeal this section and asked Police not to arrest anyone under this section.

Section 124A

Whoever by words either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the govt established by the law in India, shall be punished with (imprisonment for life), to which fine may be added, or with fine.

Explanation 1- The expression “disaffection” includes disloyalty and all feelings of enmity.

Explanation 2- Comments expressing disapprobation of the measures of the govt with a view to obtaining their alteration by lawful means, without exciting or attempting to ti excite hatred, contempt, or disaffection, do not constitute an offense under this section.

Explanation 3- Comments expressing disapprobation of the administrative or other action of the govt without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection, do not constitute an offense under this section.

A concerned SC judge recently held law-enforcing agencies guilty of hounding dissidents under this section is a violation of the guidelines set in legal stone to limit the potential for its misuse. Even lower courts also have the same feeling. Sensing the growing impatience among the judiciary over the repeated misuse of the law. The attorney general has acknowledged that there is a need to do more to prevent the misuse of Section 124A. Now Congress party that famously promised in its 2019 poll manifesto to scrap 124A but has since then hypocritically reneged on its word, opting to use the provision in the states where they are ruling. Critics say this law periodically resurrects facets of the Emergency.

But one thing is certain that there should be some law so that sedition-type crimes do not happen.

 

Waiting for your views/comments.

Anil Malik

Mumbai, India

27^th July 2021