Lawyers representing sedition accused hopeful but road ahead not easy

Most of the cases also contain charges under other provisions of the law that will prevent them from being released based on the May 11 Supreme Court order.

While lawyers representing those accused of sedition celebrated what they called a “historic” order from the Supreme Court on sedition, the road ahead for many of them still in jail might not be as easy with most of the cases also containing charges under other provisions of the law that will prevent them from being released based on May 11 order.

Almost all lawyers The Hindu spoke to agreed that the order would open doors for the accused in jails but some also highlighted that the order might lead to problems for certain accused who were charged under other Sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) like Section 153A and 505 and the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) alongside sedition.

While cases like that of Member of Parliament Navneet Rana and Member of the Legislative Assembly Ravi Rana and more recently that of television news anchor Aman Chopra have shown that they were able to get relief from the courts much sooner than others, many like activists Umar Khalid, JNU student leader Sharjeel Imam, journalist Siddique Kappan, and others have a difficult road ahead with other charges added to the sedition offence against them.

Advocate Madhuvan Dutt Chathurvedi, who is representing members of the Campus Front of India in the Hathras-related sedition case in which Mr. Kappan is also an accused and the Kashmiri students who were charged with sedition in Agra, Uttar Pradesh, for supporting Pakistan in a cricket match, said that the order might create a hindrance for many sedition accused in jails.

Mr. Chathurvedi spoke of the nature of how the sedition law was used by the Police. "Many sedition cases where accused are currently in jails are where the Police usually slap other charges under laws like UAPA, which will only prevent them from getting out given that the SC has allowed proceedings to continue in other offences."

For instance, the "main conspiracy case" in the North-East Delhi riots of February 2020 and the case where Mr. Kappan and seven others stand accused have UAPA charges as well as several other grave offences under the IPC _ meaning a relief might be farther away for them than for other people accused only under sedition.

The Uttar Pradesh-based lawyer added that the Supreme Court order clearly spelt out that all pending trials, appeals and proceedings with respect to "charges framed" under Section 124A should be kept in abeyance. "This raises a question as to what happens to those who have been arrested for sedition but against whom charges have not yet been framed, like in the Hathras case," he said.