Legislative Continuity Or Disguised Reform? Deconstructing The Transition From Sedition Under Section 124a IPC To Acts Endangering Sovereignty Under Section 152 BNS
- IJLLR Journal
- Apr 25
- 1 min read
Sneha Singh, Maharaja Agrasen Institute of Management Studies, Rohini
ABSTRACT
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) brought a major change to India’s criminal justice system. It replaced the colonial-era Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) with a new legal framework. At the center of this change is the transformation of the controversial sedition clause, Section 124A IPC, into the newly defined Section 152 BNS. This new section makes it a crime to commit “acts endangering sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India.” This paper compares these two clauses and questions whether the BNS truly departs from colonial legal traditions or simply puts a new spin on them. Through a detailed look at key rulings such as Kedarnath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962), Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015), and the important sedition case in S.G. Vombatkere v. Union of India (2022), along with a review of sedition laws in the United Kingdom, United States, and Australia, this paper argues that Section 152 BNS, despite its claims of decolonization, still holds onto the main issues of sedition. Its broader definition may increase, rather than lessen, threats to free speech and dissent. The paper concludes with suggestions for reform based on international Human rights standards.
Keywords: Sedition, Section 124A IPC, Section 152 BNS, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Free Speech, Decolonization, International Human Rights, Acts Endangering Sovereignty, Criminal Law Reform.
