Mobilenews24x7 Bureau
Arundhati Roy and Showkat Hussain are facing charges for delivering ‘provocative’ speeches at a conference in Delhi 13 years ago. Hussain a former Professor at the Central University of Kashmir.
Both are facing charges of ‘provocative’ speeches at a conference in Delhi 13 years ago.
Very recently the LG has granted sanction for the prosecution of the accused under sections 153A, 153B and 505 of the Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’) indicating that a prima facie case is made out.
It may be recalled that both the the accused have also been charged with the offence of Sedition under section 124A of the IPC, sanction has not been granted in light of the Supreme Court’s (SC) decision last year staying all sedition prosecutions.
In October 2010, a conference was organised by the Committee for Release of Political Prisoners, where the accused made the speeches in question. In a complaint, filed by a social activist, it was alleged that these speeches were seditious and provocative in nature.
Interestingly, the police initially refused to register a case, underlining that no offence was made out for lack of criminal intent.
Then in pursuance of an order passed by the Magistrate, a First Information Report (‘FIR’) was registered a month after the speech.
Inciting public mischief
The charges under sections 153A, 153B, and 505 IPC imply that the speeches made by the accused promoted enmity between different groups and incited public mischief.
While section 153A deals with speech that promotes enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence etc, section 153B criminalises any speech that is prejudicial to national integration by promoting disharmony between members of any religious, regional, racial etc. group or for advocating denial of rights to certain groups of citizen.
Section 505, on the other hand, relates to speech made with the intent to incite any class or community to commit an offence against any other class or community.
The speeches made at the conference were certainly charged and political in nature. They were also made in the backdrop of serious public order disturbances in Jammu & Kashmir in the summer of 2010.
.
What cannot be lost sight of is that the strict rigours and the complexity of determining whether the offences have been committed, there are also grave concerns about how the investigation has been carried out in this case.
Cold storage
It can be argued that the probe, which commenced in 2010, has seen virtually no progress, with allegations of tampering in the CDs containing the speech, missing files, and non-appearance of the investigation officer leading to warrants against him.
The very fact that this case, dormant for over a decade, has suddenly resurfaced, raises questions about the motivations behind the prosecution, particularly when these provisions are often misused to intimidate people and stifle dissent.
These days there are instances that there has been a increase in cases of people being charged for promoting enmity while expressing their opinions or even making jokes.
Data from the National Crime Records Bureau also reveals the increase in registration of these cases in recent years. The number of persons arrested under section 153A and 153B have increased by 161%, from 648 in 2014 to 1695 in 2021 and the number of cases registered have increased by 228% from 336 in 2014 to 1104 in 2021.
The conviction rate has, how
At the heart of these provisions is the need to ensure public order and prevent malicious and targeted attempts at disturbing the communal fabric of the country.
But as past instances have shown, these provisions are often invoked to curtail genuine expression of opinion. In the enforcement of provisions such as these, the real test lies in ensuring that they don’t encroach on the much-cherished freedom of speech and expression
