Source: The Hindu 

Introduction 

The recent ruling by the Rajasthan High Court in Tejender Pal Singh v. State of Rajasthan (2024) raises significant concerns about Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and its potential misuse as a substitute for sedition laws. While the BNS does not explicitly mention sedition, the vague language and broad scope of Section 152 could effectively criminalize legitimate dissent and criticism, much like its predecessor Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code. 

What Was the Background and Observations of Tejender Pal Singh v. State of Rajasthan (2024) ? 

• The case involved a quashing petition filed by a Sikh preacher who was charged under Sections 152 and 197 of BNS for posting a Facebook video expressing sympathy for pro-Khalistani leader Amritpal Singh. 
• The Court noted that Section 152 BNS had its roots in Section 124A (sedition) of the IPC and required cautious application in harmony with freedom of speech and expression. 
• For Section 152 to be invoked, the Court ruled there must be an imminent connection between the speech and likelihood of rebellion - the provision should be a "shield for national security" rather than a "sword against dissent." 
• Regarding Section 197, the Court clarified that critical expression without incitement to violence or hatred does not fall under its scope. 
• The Court examined the video in question and found that while the Punjabi language used might seem offensive due to its direct and expressive nature, there was no malicious intent from the speaker. 
• According to the Court, the video's message was about equality among Indian citizens and did not attempt to excite rebellion or promote separatist activities. 
• The Court ultimately quashed the FIR, finding no offenses under either Section 152 or 197 of BNS were established against the petitioner. 

What is Section 152 of BNS ? 

• The offense involves any person who assaults, threatens to assault, obstructs, or attempts to obstruct a public servant who is performing their duty specifically related to: 
  • Dispersing an unlawful assembly 
  • Suppressing a riot 
  • Stopping an affray (public fight/disturbance) 
• The law also covers anyone who uses, threatens to use, or attempts to use criminal force against such public servants in these situations. Criminal force refers to any intentional use of force without the public servant's consent. 
• For this section to apply, the public servant must be actively engaged in their official duty of maintaining public order when the offense occurs. The law specifically protects them during riot control and crowd management situations. 
• The punishment prescribed under this section includes: 
  • Imprisonment which may extend up to 3 years 
  • Fine (amount at court's discretion) 
  • Or both imprisonment and fine together 
• This section aims to protect public servants like police officers and other law enforcement personnel who are responsible for maintaining law and order during potentially dangerous situations involving crowds or violent disturbances. 
• The section recognizes that interfering with public servants during riot control not only endangers the officer but also compromises public safety and order, hence warranting specific legal protection and penalties. 

What is Section 197 of BNS ? 

• This section criminalizes the act of issuing or signing any certificate that is either:  
• Required by law to be given/signed, OR 
• Related to facts that are legally admissible as evidence when the person knows or believes the certificate contains materially false information. 
• The punishment for this offense is the same as giving false evidence (perjury), as it's considered equally serious to falsify official documentation that the law relies upon for evidence. 
• The key elements required to establish this offense are:  
  • The certificate must be one required by law or legally admissible as evidence 
  • The person must have knowledge or belief that the certificate contains false information 
  • The false information must be "material" (significant/important) to the certificate's purpose 
  • This section aims to maintain the integrity of official documentation and prevent the creation of false evidence that could mislead legal proceedings or official matters. 

What is the Difference Between Section 124A of IPC and Section 152 of BNS?

Conclusion 

To prevent Section 152 from becoming a de facto sedition law, courts must establish clear guidelines that protect legitimate criticism and free expression. The provision's interpretation should be guided by established judicial precedents that distinguish between genuine threats to national security and protected speech. Without such safeguards and a balanced approach, Section 152 risks creating the same chilling effect on free speech that prompted the suspension of the sedition law in the first place. Courts must ensure this new provision does not weak the fundamental right to free expression in a democratic society.