Skip to main content
Sabrang
Sabrang
Freedom Rule of Law

SC quashes Sedition case against journalist Vinod Dua

It held that every journalist is entitled to protection under the Kedarnath judgment

Sabrangindia 03 Jun 2021

Image Courtesy:barandbench.com

The Supreme Court has quashed the Sedition case against journalist Vinod Dua registered at the Himachal Pradesh Police in connection with a video uploaded on YouTube last year criticising the Central government’s poor implementation of the Covid-19 lockdown.

Bar & Bench quoted the Division Bench of Justices UU Lalit and Vineet Saran saying, “We have quashed the proceedings and FIR. Every journalist will be entitled to the protection under Kedar Nath Singh (sedition) judgment.”

In this landmark ruling, the constitutionality of Sedition law was upheld but the 5 judge Bench also said that the offense of Sedition is constituted only when the words spoken have the tendency or intention to create disorder or disturb public peace by resorting to violence. 

However, the Bench rejected a prayer by Vinod Dua to direct that no FIR should be registered against any media personnel with 10 years’ experience unless cleared by an expert committee. The court ruled, “We have rejected the committee formation prayer since it will be directly encroaching upon the legislative domain. However, the FIR against Vinod Dua stands quashed”, reported B&B.

An FIR was registered against him based on a complaint filed by BJP leader Ajay Shyam after he made personal comments against Prime Minister Narendra Modi on his YouTube program titled “Vinod Dua show”.

He was reportedly booked under Indian Penal Code sections 124A (sedition), 268 (public nuisance), 501 (printing defamatory matter) and 505 (intent to cause public mischief). Dua was also charged for offences under the Disaster Management Act including spreading of misinformation and false claims.

According to LiveLaw, Ajay Shyam had alleged that Dua, in his YouTube show, accused the Prime Minister of using “deaths and terror attacks” to get votes. On June 14, 2020, the top court had granted Dua protection from arrest till further orders. However, it had refused to stay the ongoing investigation against him.

On the other hand, Vinod Dua had submitted before the court that lodging of FIR and coercive steps against him amounted to direct and brazen violation of his fundamental rights.

As per Bar & Bench, he also stated in his petition, “The Petitioner also made a reference to the politicisation of the army’s attack in response to the Pulwama Attack and usage of the same in the last elections. There was nothing in the video which could be remotely termed to be criminal.”

On the issue of this controversial provision and invocation of sedition, the Supreme Court is mulling interpreting the law, especially on its application to freedom of press. The court made this observation while granting protection to two news channels of Andhra Pradesh from coercive action as they were charged of Sedition, promoting enmity and making statements conducing to public mischief.

Justice Chandrachud said that if a TV channel says something, it cannot be termed as sedition, and that “some guidelines must be set”.

Related:

SC mulls laying guidelines for application of Sedition law on journalists
SC to consider Constitutional validity of Sedition law, issues notice

SC quashes Sedition case against journalist Vinod Dua

It held that every journalist is entitled to protection under the Kedarnath judgment

Image Courtesy:barandbench.com

The Supreme Court has quashed the Sedition case against journalist Vinod Dua registered at the Himachal Pradesh Police in connection with a video uploaded on YouTube last year criticising the Central government’s poor implementation of the Covid-19 lockdown.

Bar & Bench quoted the Division Bench of Justices UU Lalit and Vineet Saran saying, “We have quashed the proceedings and FIR. Every journalist will be entitled to the protection under Kedar Nath Singh (sedition) judgment.”

In this landmark ruling, the constitutionality of Sedition law was upheld but the 5 judge Bench also said that the offense of Sedition is constituted only when the words spoken have the tendency or intention to create disorder or disturb public peace by resorting to violence. 

However, the Bench rejected a prayer by Vinod Dua to direct that no FIR should be registered against any media personnel with 10 years’ experience unless cleared by an expert committee. The court ruled, “We have rejected the committee formation prayer since it will be directly encroaching upon the legislative domain. However, the FIR against Vinod Dua stands quashed”, reported B&B.

An FIR was registered against him based on a complaint filed by BJP leader Ajay Shyam after he made personal comments against Prime Minister Narendra Modi on his YouTube program titled “Vinod Dua show”.

He was reportedly booked under Indian Penal Code sections 124A (sedition), 268 (public nuisance), 501 (printing defamatory matter) and 505 (intent to cause public mischief). Dua was also charged for offences under the Disaster Management Act including spreading of misinformation and false claims.

According to LiveLaw, Ajay Shyam had alleged that Dua, in his YouTube show, accused the Prime Minister of using “deaths and terror attacks” to get votes. On June 14, 2020, the top court had granted Dua protection from arrest till further orders. However, it had refused to stay the ongoing investigation against him.

On the other hand, Vinod Dua had submitted before the court that lodging of FIR and coercive steps against him amounted to direct and brazen violation of his fundamental rights.

As per Bar & Bench, he also stated in his petition, “The Petitioner also made a reference to the politicisation of the army’s attack in response to the Pulwama Attack and usage of the same in the last elections. There was nothing in the video which could be remotely termed to be criminal.”

On the issue of this controversial provision and invocation of sedition, the Supreme Court is mulling interpreting the law, especially on its application to freedom of press. The court made this observation while granting protection to two news channels of Andhra Pradesh from coercive action as they were charged of Sedition, promoting enmity and making statements conducing to public mischief.

Justice Chandrachud said that if a TV channel says something, it cannot be termed as sedition, and that “some guidelines must be set”.

Related:

SC mulls laying guidelines for application of Sedition law on journalists
SC to consider Constitutional validity of Sedition law, issues notice

Related Articles

Sunday

03

Jan

Pan-India

Saturday

05

Dec

05 pm onwards

Rise in Rage!

North Gate, JNU campus

Thursday

26

Nov

10 am onwards

Delhi Chalo

Pan India

Theme

2020

Milestones 2020

In the year devastated by the Covid 19 Pandemic, India witnessed apathy against some of its most marginalised people and vilification of dissenters by powerful state and non state actors. As 2020 draws to a close, and hundreds of thousands of Indian farmers continue their protest in the bitter North Indian cold. Read how Indians resisted all attempts to snatch away fundamental and constitutional freedoms.
Migrant Diaries

Migrant Diaries

The 2020 COVID pandemic brought to fore the dismal lives that our migrant workers lead. Read these heartbreaking stories of how they lived before the pandemic, how the lockdown changed their lives and what they’re doing now.
Delhi HC

Hate Speech and Delhi Pogrom 2020

A spate of provocative speeches, that amount to hate speech in law and should be prosecuted allowed blood letting to spill on the streets of north east Delhi in February-March 2020
hashimpura

Hashimpura Massacre

The Lemmings of Hashimpura

Campaigns

Sunday

03

Jan

Pan-India

Saturday

05

Dec

05 pm onwards

Rise in Rage!

North Gate, JNU campus

Thursday

26

Nov

10 am onwards

Delhi Chalo

Pan India

IN FACT

Analysis

2020

Milestones 2020

In the year devastated by the Covid 19 Pandemic, India witnessed apathy against some of its most marginalised people and vilification of dissenters by powerful state and non state actors. As 2020 draws to a close, and hundreds of thousands of Indian farmers continue their protest in the bitter North Indian cold. Read how Indians resisted all attempts to snatch away fundamental and constitutional freedoms.
Migrant Diaries

Migrant Diaries

The 2020 COVID pandemic brought to fore the dismal lives that our migrant workers lead. Read these heartbreaking stories of how they lived before the pandemic, how the lockdown changed their lives and what they’re doing now.
Delhi HC

Hate Speech and Delhi Pogrom 2020

A spate of provocative speeches, that amount to hate speech in law and should be prosecuted allowed blood letting to spill on the streets of north east Delhi in February-March 2020
hashimpura

Hashimpura Massacre

The Lemmings of Hashimpura

Archives