Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which criminalised sedition — defined as bringing or attempting to bring into hatred or contempt, or exciting or attempting to excite disaffection towards, the Government established by law — has been abolished under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The word "sedition" does not appear anywhere in the BNS. While Section 152 BNS creates a new offence of "acts endangering sovereignty, unity and integrity of India," this is a distinct and substantially broader provision, not a direct replacement for sedition.
What changed
| Old law | New law | |
|---|---|---|
| Act | Indian Penal Code, 1860 | Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 |
| Section | 124A | No direct equivalent (Section 152 BNS is distinct) |
| Title | Sedition | (Abolished) |
| Change type | Abolished — sedition offence removed from Indian criminal law |
Full statutory text
Section 124A IPC — Sedition (repealed w.e.f. 1 July 2024)
Whoever, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards, the Government established by law in India, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added, or with fine.
Explanation 1 — The expression "disaffection" includes disloyalty and all feelings of enmity. Explanation 2 — Comments expressing disapprobation of the measures of the Government with a view to obtain their alteration by lawful means, without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection, do not constitute an offence under this section. Explanation 3 — Comments expressing disapprobation of the administrative or other action of the Government without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection, do not constitute an offence under this section.
Section 152 BNS — Acts endangering sovereignty, unity and integrity of India (NOT a replacement)
Whoever, purposely or knowingly, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or by 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; or indulges in or commits any such act shall be punished with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Explanation. — Comments expressing disapprobation of the measures, or administrative or other action of the Government with a view to obtain their alteration by lawful means without exciting or attempting to excite the activities referred to in this section do not constitute an offence under this section.
Key differences
Sedition abolished — "disaffection" removed: The central concept of IPC 124A was "disaffection" towards the government. The BNS entirely removes this concept. No provision in the BNS penalises criticism of, contempt for, or disaffection towards the government. This represents the end of the colonial-era sedition offence that was first introduced in 1870.
Section 152 BNS is not a replacement: Section 152 BNS creates a fundamentally different offence. It targets acts that endanger sovereignty, unity, or integrity of India — specifically secession, armed rebellion, subversive activities, and separatist activities. The focus shifts from protecting the government from criticism to protecting the nation from existential threats. Criticising the government's policies, expressing dissatisfaction with governance, or demanding policy changes do not fall within Section 152.
Expanded modes of commission: Section 152 BNS explicitly includes electronic communication and financial means as modes of commission, reflecting contemporary realities. IPC 124A was limited to words, signs, and visible representations.
Higher maximum punishment: Section 152 BNS prescribes imprisonment for life or up to seven years plus fine. IPC 124A prescribed imprisonment for life or up to three years plus fine. The enhanced sentence reflects the gravity of the offences targeted — secession and armed rebellion — rather than mere expression of dissent.
Broader but different scope: While Section 152 is broader in covering modern means (electronic, financial), it is narrower in one critical respect — it does not penalise "disaffection" or "contempt" towards the government. However, terms like "subversive activities" and "encourages feelings of separatist activities" remain undefined and have attracted criticism for potential vagueness. The MCP-verified text also reveals Section 152 is a single section (not two sub-sections as initially reported) — the electronic communication and financial means are modes of commission within the main provision itself.
Explanation preserving legitimate criticism: Contrary to early commentary, the verified text of Section 152 BNS does contain an Explanation that protects "comments expressing disapprobation of the measures, or administrative or other action of the Government with a view to obtain their alteration by lawful means without exciting or attempting to excite the activities referred to in this section." This consolidates the two separate Explanations from IPC 124A into a single, broader safeguard that explicitly protects both policy criticism and administrative criticism, provided it does not cross into inciting secession, armed rebellion, or subversive activities.
What this means for practitioners
For pending sedition cases: All pending trials, appeals, and proceedings under Section 124A IPC are affected by the repeal. The Supreme Court had already placed these proceedings in abeyance through its order in S.G. Vombatkere v. Union of India (May 2022). With the formal repeal effective 1 July 2024, practitioners should move for discharge or acquittal in all pending Section 124A cases where the alleged conduct does not independently satisfy the elements of Section 152 BNS or any other surviving offence.
For new cases: Prosecutors cannot invoke sedition for any conduct occurring on or after 1 July 2024. Where the conduct genuinely involves encouraging secession, armed rebellion, or subversive activities, Section 152 BNS is the appropriate charge. Practitioners must carefully distinguish between political dissent (protected under Article 19(1)(a)) and genuine incitement to secession or armed rebellion (potentially falling under Section 152).
For constitutional challenges: Section 152 BNS is likely to face constitutional challenges on grounds of vagueness, particularly regarding the terms "subversive activities" and "encourages feelings of separatist activities." Practitioners should monitor emerging jurisprudence on whether courts will read down these terms using the Kedar Nath Singh framework — requiring incitement to violence or tendency to create public disorder.
For defence counsel: In cases where Section 152 BNS is invoked, the defence should argue that the Kedar Nath Singh principle — which limited Section 124A to speech with tendency to incite violence or public disorder — must inform the interpretation of Section 152 as well. Mere criticism of the government or expressions of regional identity should not attract prosecution.
Does old case law still apply?
Case law on Section 124A IPC has limited direct applicability since the offence itself has been abolished. However, the constitutional principles developed in these cases remain highly relevant to the interpretation of Section 152 BNS.
Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar AIR 1962 SC 955 — The five-judge Constitution Bench upheld Section 124A's constitutional validity but read it down significantly, holding that the offence requires incitement to violence or tendency to create public disorder. Mere strong words or criticism of the government, without more, do not constitute sedition. While this case specifically concerned Section 124A, the underlying principle — that speech restrictions must be linked to public order — is a constitutional requirement under Article 19(2) that binds the interpretation of Section 152 BNS.
S.G. Vombatkere v. Union of India (2022) — The Supreme Court placed all sedition proceedings in abeyance while the government reconsidered the provision. This order paved the way for the eventual abolition of Section 124A. Pending cases that were stayed under this order must now be formally disposed of following the repeal.
Balwant Singh v. State of Punjab (1995) 3 SCC 214 — The Court acquitted two men who raised pro-Khalistan slogans, holding that mere raising of slogans without incitement to violence does not constitute sedition. This principle — that expression without incitement to violence is protected — continues to govern the interpretation of Section 152 BNS.
Vinod Dua v. Union of India (2021) 9 SCC 527 — The Court quashed an FIR against a journalist under Section 124A, reaffirming that every citizen has a right to criticise and comment on government actions. This right continues undiminished under the BNS framework.
Judicial developments post-abolition (post-July 2024)
No post-July 2024 Delhi High Court cases directly invoking Section 152 BNS were found in the Veritect Legal Intelligence database as of April 2026. The absence of reported cases under Section 152 may indicate that prosecutors are exercising caution in applying this new provision, or that cases registered are still at the trial court stage.
However, the Delhi High Court's decision in Nayeem Ahmad Khan v. NIA (Crl. Appeal 118/2023, decided 9 April 2025) is relevant context. While this case involved charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act rather than Section 152 BNS, the Court's analysis of the distinction between protected speech and secessionist conspiracy provides guidance for Section 152 cases. The Court upheld denial of bail where extensive documentary and testimonial material established participation in a secessionist conspiracy, reinforcing that the threshold for criminalising sovereignty-related conduct requires more than mere expression — it requires evidence of active participation in or facilitation of secession, armed rebellion, or subversive activities.
Veritect reference: DLHC010029052023_1_2025-04-09
Frequently asked questions
Has sedition been abolished in India? Yes. Section 124A IPC, which criminalised sedition, stands repealed effective 1 July 2024 with the commencement of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The word "sedition" does not appear in the BNS.
Is Section 152 BNS the same as sedition? No. Section 152 BNS targets acts endangering the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India — specifically secession, armed rebellion, and subversive activities. It does not penalise "disaffection" or "contempt" towards the government, which was the essence of sedition under IPC 124A. Section 152 is a distinct and different offence.
What happens to pending sedition cases? Pending cases under IPC Section 124A, which were already stayed by the Supreme Court's order in S.G. Vombatkere (2022), should be formally disposed of following the repeal. Accused persons may apply for discharge or acquittal. Where the alleged conduct also constitutes an offence under Section 152 BNS or other surviving provisions, fresh proceedings may be initiated.
Can you still be arrested for criticising the government? No provision in the BNS criminalises criticism of the government. However, if speech crosses the line into encouraging secession, armed rebellion, or subversive activities, Section 152 BNS may apply. The constitutional right to free speech under Article 19(1)(a), subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2), continues to protect legitimate political expression and dissent.