Skip to main content

Chargesheet against journalist Kappan a bid to 'consider' any dissent, criticism a crime

By Siddique Qureshi* 
Movement Against UAPA and Other Repressive Laws (MURL) chairperson Justice BG Kolse Patil has said that in a statement that the Uttar Pradesh Special Task Force (STF) chargesheet in the Siddiqui Kappan case is a highly disturbing document that goes against the Supreme Court's efforts to read the sedition law and prevent its misuse.
According to Justice Kolse Patil, former judge of the Bombay High Court, during a preliminary hearing on a bunch of petitions challenging the sedition law, the Chief Justice of India, NV Ramana, expressed concern over the misuse of the law and the lack of accountability of executive agencies. The Supreme Court's stance reinforced growing criticism that the colonial-era law was being misused by the state to curb citizens' freedom, including freedom of expression.
In recent times, the court has been consistently barring sedition, citing the rigor in the enforcement of the archaic law and the lack of due process. This has pointed to a low conviction rate in these cases, which have shown a significant increase since the year 2016, according to the National Crime Record Bureau (NCRB) data, sedition cases, and those under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) saw a rise in 2019, but only 3% of sedition cases led to convictions.
In this backdrop, the 5,000-page chargesheet filed by the UP STF against Delhi-based journalist Siddiqui Kappan only corroborates the many apprehensions and concerns that have been expressed by civil liberties groups and supported by the apex court. The chargesheet lays out strange allegations against Kappan, who was arrested a year ago, when he was on his way to Hathras in UP to report on the murder of a Dalit woman.
Kappan was booked under the stringent UAPA, and also charged with sedition (Section 124A of IPC). He has been accused of conspiring to incite unrest and riots – the chargesheet claims that Kappan did not write as a "responsible" journalist, "reports only and only to incite Muslims", and of Maoists and Communists and expressed sympathy with It.
Justice BG Kolse Patil
They have presented volumes of 36 articles written by Kappan in Malayalam – on anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests, riots in northeast Delhi, Nizamuddin Markaz gathering during Covid – as evidence. The STF has attached a case diary note, discussing an article written by Kappan during the anti-CAA protests at Aligarh Muslim University, saying, “In the writing, Muslims are portrayed as victims (who were beaten up by the police and were asked to go to Pakistan).
Kappan has also been accused of serving as a "think tank" of what they call “Popular Front of India (PFI)". These "accusations" are unthinkable, unbearable, and too fictitious to think that they might constitute treason. Clearly, the UP STF is attempting a new definition of crime, in which the government grades any dissent and criticism.
The chargesheet against Kappan is a highly disturbing document that goes against the Supreme Court's efforts to read the sedition law and prevent its misuse. This creates much of the fear that has been highlighted by the court – "executive agencies severely limit individual liberties and criminalize dissent by using a vaguely worded law".
---
*Coordinator, Movement Against UAPA and Other Repressive Laws (MURL)

Comments

  1. I think Indians are overly sensitive about Sedition. People are sued for decorating a cake with flag and or map of India, or sometimes putting feet on the table where a flag is kept. This is ridiculous. I have read many other nonsensical reasons. However, the duty of state is to maintain law and order and not let an explosive situation become worse. I know and have read many writers purposely present partial news and do a slanted analysis, with a view of embarrassing the current Govt., and disturb/delay the onset of peace, and make the situation worse and uncontrollable. To that extent such writers and politicians must be condemned and held accountable.Preventing such people from aggravating the situation, is duty of State. However, using Sedition as a charge is truly going too far.Sedition should be used only for direct acts of sedition and should have a narrower definition.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

NOTE: Hateful, abusive comments won't be published. -- Editor

TRENDING

A fearless spirit lost: Rebecca Thomson dies at 17-hour Catalina Swim Mark

By Harsh Thakor  On July 26, 2026, Rebecca “Becky” Thomson suffered cardiac arrest while attempting the Catalina Channel Swim — a marathon open water crossing from Catalina Island to the California mainland. After swimming for 17 hours, Thomson collapsed in the water. Despite the painstaking efforts of emergency responders and the medical staff at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, she succumbed to a devastating hypoxic brain injury and died Friday evening.

Women's groups, feminists hail wrestlers' courage, vow to continue fight after Brij Bhushan acquittal

By A Representative   In a powerful show of solidarity, more than 250 prominent feminists and members of women's organisations across India have condemned the acquittal of former BJP MP and ex-Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) president Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh in the high-profile sexual harassment case filed by six women wrestlers. The signatories have expressed unwavering support for the wrestlers who have waged a courageous legal battle for justice against formidable odds.

An open letter to PM: Before you forgive, ask for forgiveness

By Martin Macwan*  Respected Prime Minister,  The first step toward true forgiveness is asking for it, and it is out of respect for the Constitution that the title "Honourable" is used for the office of the Prime Minister. Every abuse is "dirty" because almost all abuse is uttered with the conscious intention of publicly humiliating a woman, much like the disrobing of Draupadi in the royal court. This includes remarks like "Jersey Cow," used at public meetings on the Gujarati land of Gandhi and Sardar; comparing a female MP's laughter in India's Parliament to "Surpanakha's laugh"; and using a vulgar address like "Didi O Didi" for a Chief Minister who holds a respected position in a democracy—along with every other such remark. In the 79-year history of independent India, you are better placed than anyone to say which Prime Minister has used such language against women.