India travailed for 150 years under the crown’s despotic ‘law of sedition’. The anticipated sojourn took an immortal form. Following this, there were many crusades and trials that took their respective turns, the matter formed a crucial topic of debate, some even turned out as epoch- making as for when the constituent assembly removed the word sedition from article 13(2) of the Indian constitution. However, law makers preferred to remain in lull state, there were times when promises were made but turned out to be fake and a result we can still find this archaic law under the section 124A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The colonial legacy continues to haunt the soul of basic structure of the constitution that guarantees “freedom of speech and expression” under the article 19(1) (a) of the constitution. The satire pertains to the fact that ‘England’ who played the pivotal role in the propagation of the sedition laws in its colonies withdrew the relic from its statute book not less than 10 years before. The intention was simple – to set a paradigm. The democracy is seen to be are reflection of transparency and freedom of speech is its hallmark. While many countries can proudly proclaim their rights being a real democracy, India lags behind in this sphere and hence the question persists: Can India still be called a democratic country?
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits remixing, adapting, and building upon the work for non-commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.