SC Shields The Wire Editor, Issues Notice on Challenge to ‘New Sedition’ Law Section 152 BNS
The FIR against Siddharth Varadarajan followed an article by The Wire on Operation Sindoor under which India targeted terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir in May in retaliation for the April 22 Pahalgam attack;
The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted interim protection from coercive action to The Wire’s founding Editor Siddharth Varadarajan in connection with an FIR lodged by the Assam Police under Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), a provision alleged to have effectively revived the repealed sedition law.
The FIR against Varadarajan was registered after an article was published in 'The Wire' on Operation Sindoor, under which India targeted terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir in May in retaliation for the April 22 Pahalgam attack.
The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued notice on a petition filed by the Foundation for Independent Journalism and Varadarajan challenging the constitutional validity of Section 152, which penalises acts endangering the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India.
The plea contends that the provision is vague and prone to misuse, creating a chilling effect on the media.
Senior Advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan, appearing for the petitioners, argued that Section 152 mirrors the old sedition provision (Section 124A IPC) and suffers from the same defects. “Vagueness is a valid ground for striking down a penal provision. This is sheer expression without substance,” she contended, adding that its use against journalists shows its potential for abuse.
Justice Bagchi, however, queried whether “potential for abuse” alone was enough to strike down a law, stressing that legislative power and its implementation are distinct questions.
Justice Kant observed that “political dissent may not endanger sovereignty” but defining “endangering sovereignty” too narrowly could also be problematic.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appearing for the Union of India, informed the Court that a new “negative explanation” had been inserted in the provision, and argued that challenging the vires of the section should not serve as a “backdoor anticipatory bail” mechanism.
Issuing notice, the Court tagged the matter with a pending petition on the same issue and directed that no coercive steps be taken against Varadarajan in FIR No. 181/2025 registered at Morigaon, Assam.
Additionally, the Court directed the petitioner to cooperate with the investigation when required.
Notably, Section 152 of the BNS deals with the "act endangering sovereignty, unity and integrity of India"
It reads- "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 means, 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."
The Writ Petition filed through AoR Bharat Gupta, and drafted by Advocate Stuti Rai challenged the constitutionality of Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), the new “sedition” provision, after The Wire’s founding editor Siddharth Varadarajan was booked by Assam Police over a news report. The plea also seeks protection from coercive action in connection with the FIR, which invokes Sections 152, 197(1)(d) and 353(1)(b) of the BNS.
Section 152 criminalises acts “endangering sovereignty, unity and integrity of India” and is substantially similar in language and effect to the colonial-era Section 124A IPC. The older sedition provision is already under constitutional challenge in S.G. Vombatkere v. Union of India, where the Apex court, by its 11 May 2022 interim order, restrained registration of FIRs under Section 124A until the matter is decided. The petition contends that Section 152 is being used to sidestep that order and target journalists and media outlets.
The impugned FIR stems from a June 29 report on The Wire quoting India’s defence attaché in Indonesia about the loss of IAF fighter jets during an operation, allegedly due to political constraints. The story included, in full, the Indian Embassy’s clarification that the remarks were taken out of context. The petition notes that the same seminar and comments were widely covered by other national media outlets.
It alleges that the complaint, filed by a ruling party functionary in Assam, falsely claims misquotation and accuses The Wire of a pattern of “misleading” reports. The FIR itself is not publicly accessible, but the petition warns that similar complaints may have been lodged elsewhere.
Calling Section 152 “vague” and “prone to abuse” like its IPC predecessor, the plea argues it violates Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and 21 of the Constitution, and that even if a report were inaccurate, prosecuting journalists under a life-imprisonment offence would be “grossly disproportionate” and unconstitutional.
The petition seeks the Court’s intervention not just to strike down Section 152, but also to lay down guidelines to prevent misuse of criminal law against journalists. It stresses that no immunity is sought, only safeguards to ensure prosecutions are bona fide and not reprisals for critical reporting.
Case Title: Foundation for Independent Journalism v. Union of India
Hearing Date: August 12, 2025
Bench: Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi