The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that shouting slogans against a democratic government does not constitute sedition, characterizing such actions as expressions of dissent rather than incitement to hatred or contempt. The ruling came as a division bench of Justices Vinod S Bhardwaj and Sukhvinder Kaur dismissed the Haryana government’s appeal against a 2019 trial court verdict that acquitted four individuals of sedition and other charges.
In its ruling dated July 2, the high court emphasized the need for strict evaluation when dealing with grave charges that carry severe punishments. The bench observed that the evidence presented only indicated that the accused had shouted slogans, which represents a constitutionally protected expression of disagreement rather than an attempt to stir hatred or disaffection.
Court Distinguishes Violence From Sedition
The division bench clarified that while a violent protest might amount to rioting, acts of violence should not be automatically interpreted as attempts to bring hatred or contempt against the government. The judges noted that feelings of frustration, dissatisfaction, or outrage do not satisfy the legal definitions of disaffection or hatred required to sustain a sedition charge under Section 124-A of the Indian Penal Code.
Consequently, the court found that the essential legal elements required to establish sedition were entirely absent from the prosecution’s case.
Origins Of The 2017 Case
The prosecution’s case stemmed from a violent demonstration in Kaithal district on August 25, 2017, following the conviction of Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh, the head of Dera Sacha Sauda, in a rape case by a Panchkula court.
According to the police report registered at the Kalayat police station, an official from the state power utility, Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, filed a complaint alleging that a crowd of 14 to 15 people had marched toward the utility office. The complainant stated that the individuals, armed with wooden sticks, traditional bladed weapons, and bottles of petrol, were shouting slogans as they approached. Fearing for their safety, the office employees fled the premises, after which the mob allegedly vandalized the building.
The state government subsequently charged the accused under several sections of the Indian Penal Code, including sedition, criminal conspiracy, and disobedience of a lawful order, alongside provisions of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act. A trial court subsequently acquitted the accused on September 23, 2019, prompting the state’s failed appeal.
Investigative Failures And Lack Of Proof
In affirming the trial court’s acquittal, the high court pointed to several critical failures in the police investigation. A primary flaw was the complete absence of a test identification parade, despite the fact that the prosecution witnesses did not know the accused prior to the incident. The bench noted that the witnesses only identified the suspects for the first time during court proceedings.
In criminal law, the court explained, establishing the identity of the accused through an identification parade is of vital importance when the witnesses and the suspects are strangers.
The high court concluded that the trial court’s decision to acquit the suspects was not based on minor discrepancies, but on major contradictions, material omissions, unverified recoveries, and a lack of reliable identification. The bench criticized the prosecution for failing to provide forensic corroboration or prove that the accused were legally linked to the crimes, stating that legal proof cannot be built on mere suspicion or probabilities.
