Note4Students

From UPSC perspective, the following things are important :

Prelims level: Section 153A of IPC

Mains level: Free speech and defamation

153

Central idea: A politician was recently arrested under Section 153A of IPC for the alleged use of objectionable words against the Prime Minister.

Section 153A: What the law says

Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) penalises “promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony”.
This is punishable with imprisonment up to three years, or with fine, or with both.
The provision was enacted in 1898 and was not in the original penal code.
At the time of the amendment, promoting class hatred was a part of the English law of sedition, but was not included in the Indian law.

Charges laid for remarks against PM

The FIR mentioned the use of Sections-

153B(1) (Making imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration);
295A (Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs);
500 (Defamation); and
504 (Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace).

Data from the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) show that the rate of conviction for Section 153A is very low.
In 2020, 1,804 cases were registered, six times higher than the 323 cases in 2014.
However, the conviction rate in 2020 was 20.2%, suggesting that the process often becomes the punishment.

Hate speech laws have been invoked under regimes of all parties to crack down on criticism of public functionaries and to arrest individuals.
The invocation of Section 153A is often criticized for restricting free speech and misusing the legal processes for political purposes.

Given that the provisions are worded broadly, there are safeguards against its misuse.
For example, Sections 153A and 153B require prior sanction from the government for initiating prosecution.
But this is required before the trial begins, and not at the stage of preliminary investigation.
To curb indiscriminate arrests, the Supreme Court laid down a set of guidelines in its 2014 ruling in Arnesh Kumar v State of Bihar.
As per the guidelines, for offenses that carry a sentence of fewer than seven years, the police cannot automatically arrest an accused before investigation.