Supreme Court Clarifies Courts May Proceed With Sedition Trials if Accused Has No Objection

PTI, May 21, 2026, New Delhi : The Supreme Court on Thursday clarified that courts may proceed with sedition trials under Section 124A of the now-repealed Indian Penal Code if the accused persons have no objection to the continuation of proceedings.

The clarification came nearly four years after the apex court had ordered all trials and proceedings under the sedition law to be kept in abeyance pending a review of the colonial-era provision.

While hearing a petition filed by an accused who has been in jail for 17 years in a sedition case, a Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi directed the Madhya Pradesh High Court to hear the petitioner’s appeal and decide the matter on merits.

“The petitioner’s grievance is that he has no objection if his criminal appeal is heard in entirety, including with respect to the charge under Section 124A. That being so, we clarify that wherever the accused has no objection against proceeding of the trial, appeal, or any other proceeding where he has been charge-sheeted under Section 124A IPC also, there shall be no impediment for the courts to decide such matters on merits and in accordance with law,” the Bench stated.

Petitioner Kamran had been convicted by a Sessions Court on February 27, 2017, under Sections 122, 124A, and 153A of the IPC, along with provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Arms Act. He, along with a co-accused, was sentenced to life imprisonment.

However, his appeal remained pending before the Madhya Pradesh High Court because of the Supreme Court’s May 2022 order directing that all proceedings relating to sedition charges be kept in abeyance.

In its landmark order dated May 11, 2022, the Supreme Court had effectively put the sedition law on hold and directed the Centre and state governments not to register fresh cases under Section 124A of the IPC while the provision was under reconsideration.

The court had then observed:

“All pending trials, appeals and proceedings with respect to the charge framed under Section 124A of IPC be kept in abeyance. Adjudication with respect to other Sections, if any, could proceed if the Courts are of the opinion that no prejudice would be caused to the accused.”

Several petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the sedition law are currently pending before the Supreme Court. Among those who approached the court are the Editors Guild of India, former Major General S.G. Vombatkere, former Union Minister Arun Shourie, and journalists Kishorechandra Wangkhemcha from Manipur and Kanhaiya Lal Shukla from Chhattisgarh.

Section 124A, which is no longer part of the statute book, defined sedition as any act that brought or attempted to bring hatred, contempt, or disaffection towards the government established by law in India. The offence could be committed through spoken or written words, signs, visible representations, or other means. The provision prescribed punishment up to life imprisonment.

The sedition law was not part of the original Indian Penal Code when it came into force in 1862. It was inserted into the Code in 1870 and expanded in 1898 during British rule, largely to suppress India’s freedom movement. Several prominent freedom fighters, including Mahatma Gandhi and Bal Gangadhar Tilak, were prosecuted and imprisoned under the law.