The Government imposing the Sedition Act on anti National Activities of JNU students can be called as Tyranny?

Good Morning India.......

This morning I was reading the Article of Shree Bhanu Mehta in the IE Pune edition. I was profoundly shocked at his ideas and his thoughts on the happenings at The Jawaharlal Nehru University of Delhi. The first thought that came to my mind was, that these appeared to be the rumblings of a paid Pseudo intellectual Prestitute. It was extremely difficult to digest his ideas about Freedom of Thought, given my upbringing as an Officer of the Indian Army. For a moment I thought may be my brain is now resident in my knees, due to its slipping down from its rightful place, due to the constant stamping and marching around the drill square in 2 kg army boots. Therefore I gave some thought to his ideas about free thinking in a vibrant democracy, sedition, anti nationalism and government tyranny.

What ever happened at the JNU coupled by the behavior of responsible students, can by no means be called as free thinking, freedom of thought and just an expression of a difference of opinion, in a vibrant democracy. I am deadly against it and call them acts of supporting Kashmir separatists fueled by our arch enemy Pakistan. Some of the clarion calls and slogans, "Long live Pakistan and terrorists. If one terrorist Afzal Guru is killed more will take his place from Indian Homes.  Till India is destroyed, our war will continue our war will continue". 

These are no expressions of freedom of thought in a thriving democracy.  No sir not by a long shot. Personally these are anti national students  fueled by agents of terror. Left to me I would put these bastards against a wall and shoot the buggers. I did not expect such drivelish writing from this particular person Mr. Bhanu Mehta. But then as some politician said every person has his price.

Sedition is an overt conduct, such as speech and actions , that tends toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of the constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. Seditious words in writing are seditious libel. A seditionist is one who engages in or promotes the interests of sedition. Typically, sedition a subversive act, and the overt acts that may be prosecutable under sedition laws vary from one legal code to another.

Sedition is done with intention to cause disaffection or violence.

Binayak Sen, an Indian pediatrician, public health specialist and activist, was found guilty of sedition. He is national Vice-President of the People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL). On 24 December 2010, the Additional Sessions and District Court Judge B.P Varma Raipur found Binayak Sen, Naxal ideologue Narayan Sanyal and Kolkata businessman Piyush Guha, guilty of sedition for helping the Maoists in their fight against the state. They were sentenced to life imprisonment.

Sedition relates to the uttering of the seditious words, the publication of seditious libels, and conspiracies to do an act for the furtherance of a seditious intention, whether by words spoken or written, or by conduct.

 I am no intellectual but I understand sedition as  “an intention to bring into hatred or contempt, or to excite disaffection against, the Government and the constitution of India by law established, or either House of Parliament, or the administration of Justice.

To raise discontent or disaffection among Indian Nationals, or to promote feelings of ill will and Hostility between different classes of such subjects.”

Now looking at what happened in JNU  applying the definition of Sedition discussed above, then it is indeed an act of sedition,. These are some of the slogans reported to have been raised by the students and their leader:

 'Tum kitne Afzal maroge, ghar-ghar se Afzal niklenge' (How many Afzal's you may kill, More Afzals will sprout from every house. Afzal guru was sentenced to death for his role in the terrorist Attack on the Indian Parliament and hanged on 09 Feb 2013)

'Pakistan zindabad' (Long live Pakistan)

 'Kashmir maange azaadi, ladkar lenge azaadi' (Kashmir is asking for Independence from India, we fill fight and obtain independence for Kashmir)

'Kashmir ki azaadi tak, jung rahegi-jung rahegi' (Till Kashmir is liberated from India, we will continue our war with India, We will continue our war)

 'Bharat ki barbaadi tak, jung rahegi-jung rahegi' (Till India is destroyed, our war will continue our war will continue)

 'Afzal ki hatya nahi sahenge' 

Here are the words of Mr. Pratap Bhanu Mehta:

"This government is using Nationalism to crush constitutional patriotism,

"Legal Tyranny to crush dissent"

"Political Power to settle petty scores"

"Administrative power to destroy institutions"

He further says:

"The crackdown was an act to revel in ignorance of the law of sedition.

The government does not want to just crush dissent it wants to crush thinking"

"The government wants to peddle a patriotism whose condition of possibility is wiping out all thought."

Now again being an Army man as I mentioned earlier, I do not subscribe to the above thoughts of the writer.

I do agree that the Constitution protects the right to have anti-national and unpatriotic beliefs and opinions, and propagate them peacefully. How ever it is oftentimes forgotten that, these rights are subject to laws that impose “reasonable restrictions…in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence.”

Mr. Bhanu Mehta's thoughts in his writings appear to be tilting towards government bashing and not to the butchering of the freedom of thought as he keeps harping throughout his write.

It would have been  more appropriate if he had referred to the constitution, and put to debate the meaning and scope  of "reasonable restrictions" as mentioned in the Constitution of India, while protecting the rights of individuals to have anti national and unpatriotic beliefs and opinions and propagate them peacefully. 

To me what the students did on the JNU campus are straight acts of treason of the highest order and not acts of anti-national and unpatriotic beliefs and opinions, falling in the realms of the Indian Constitution read within reasonable bounds.

The author I think has committed treason by backing the behavior of students at JNU by saying :

"This government is using Nationalism to crush constitutional patriotism", and

"Nothing that the students did poses nearly as much threat to India, as the subversion of freedom and judgment this government represents. The honorable Ministers should realize that if this is a debate of nationalism, it is they, rather than JNU should be in the dock. They have threatened democracy, that is the most anti national of acts."

I feel the direction of this article in itself appears to be a written act of corrupting someone's personal morals which are already on the fringe of going this or that way.  The Latin root subvertere means “to turn from below,” and when you turn something on its head in a sneaky way, that's subversion and sedition .  By propagating real anti National activities as an expression of freedom of thought and speech, I do not know how many students on the fringe of this type of thinking are going to be turned in their heads thanks to these pretentious persons who affect proficiency in scholarly pursuits whilst lacking any in-depth knowledge or critical understanding of such topics. 

Subversion means : 

Anti-national: Opposed to national interests or nationalism.

Unpatriotic: Not having or expressing devotion to and vigorous support for one’s country.

Treasonous: The crime of betraying one’s country or parts thereof, especially by attempting to kill or overthrow the sovereign or government.

Seditious: Inciting or causing people to rebel against the authority of a state .

The author by writing that "It will not be a surprise if another parliamentary session will be a casualty of such overreaction".  Do I smell sedition here?