Freedom of expression

The constitution has allowed the freedom of speech the purpose is to ensure that all might bring their own thought and are free to infer and make a mention.

How sedition may be imposed just for raising question as in case of Uttarakhand’s journalists opens a new vista for the probing and subsequent implementation?

The cases of people’s harassment on their views against the state decision or against certain objectionable traditions etc. are often implied and the subject is meaninglessly victimized for his making a point of view which indeed might throw a new light on the year’s perception for the better of the civilization even.

Hon’ble High Court in a case has quashed suitably a case of sedition with this comment only that preventing citizens in expressing their ideas is instrumental in debilitating the democracy and its prime objective, which is undoubtedly well stated.

Most of the people therefore keep suffering and in the fear of getting the subject of victimization do not share at times even the most brilliant ideas that could go a long way for the national interest.

Expressions over social media do require the regulation yet not to escape from the realities that are brought forth to show mirror to the authorities

Criticizing the incumbent must not be termed as sedition the Hon’ble court has clearly spelt out and quashed it.

Freedom of expression is a fundamental right but must be sensibly adhered to.

- Sunil S Okhade

Other Editorials