BharatNotes What is Sedition (Section 152 BNS)?
Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023—which came into force on 1 July 2024 alongside the BNSS and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam—penalises anyone who "purposely or knowingly, by words... signs... visible representation... electronic communication or by use of financial mean, or otherwise, excites or attempts to excite, secession or armed rebellion or subversive activities, or encourages feelings of separatist activities or endangers sovereignty or unity and integrity of India."
It is the successor to the offence of sedition under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), though, notably, the word "sedition" does not appear anywhere in the BNS.
Key Features
| Feature | Section 124A IPC (repealed) | Section 152 BNS (from 1 July 2024) |
|---|---|---|
| Core target | Exciting "disaffection" towards the Government established by law | Endangering the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India |
| Means listed | Words, signs, visible representation | Adds electronic communication and use of financial means |
| Mental element | Not expressly stated | Expressly "purposely or knowingly" |
| Punishment (lower bracket) | Up to 3 years | Up to 7 years + fine |
| Maximum | Life imprisonment + fine | Life imprisonment + fine |
Like its predecessor, the offence is cognizable (police may arrest without warrant) and non-bailable.
The Free-Speech Safeguard
The provision carries an explanation: comments expressing disapprobation of government measures to obtain their alteration "by lawful means," without exciting the prohibited activities, do not constitute an offence. This mirrors the protective reading the Supreme Court gave Section 124A in Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962), which limited sedition to incitement to violence or public disorder, preserving the right under Article 19(1)(a).
Current Status and Judicial Caution
In May 2022, the Supreme Court in S.G. Vombatkere v. Union of India placed Section 124A IPC in abeyance, asking the Centre and States not to register fresh cases pending review.
After the BNS took effect, the Rajasthan High Court in Tejender Pal Singh v. State of Rajasthan (2024-25) cautioned that Section 152 "is sedition by another name" and must not be used to stifle legitimate dissent—holding that it applies only to deliberate acts done with malicious intent, and that lawful criticism remains protected. The judgment expressly invoked the Kedar Nath Singh safeguards.
UPSC Angle
The shift illustrates the broader IPC-to-BNS criminal-law transition and the enduring tension between national security and free expression. For Mains, examine whether renaming and broadening the offence (financial means, electronic communication, a higher 7-year ceiling) genuinely reforms the law or merely repackages it. Cross-link with Article 19 reasonable restrictions and the Law Commission's deliberations on sedition. For current affairs, track how High Courts and the Supreme Court interpret "subversive activities," a phrase undefined in the statute.
