Editorji is a popular short video news and information platform based in India. It was founded in 2018 by Vikram Chandra, one of India’s leading journalists, and has risen to prominence in the digital news space in a relatively short span of time. The platform is primarily designed for mobile devices, with applications available for Android and iOS.

ABOUT US:

about us editorji

Latest Video News: Editorji provides the latest news video headlines, latest videos clip from India and the World. Get all breaking news videos on Entertainment, Business, Coronavirus, Elections, Politics and more.

Latest Video News, Breaking News, Bollywood, Political, Sports, Business News | Editorji

+91 11 4035 6666 / info@editorji.com
3rd floor, Plot B, Khasara no 360, Sultanpur, New Delhi, Delhi 110030
<a title="mail to us" href="mailto:info@editorji.com">Send Feedback</a>
<a title="Contact Us" href="mailto:info@editorji.com">Contact Us</a>

REACH US

Contact for any questions, suggestions, comments, feedback or advertisement on Editorji.com, we are always looking forward to hearing from you.

Contact Us for Feedback, Suggestions and Advertising 

Editorji content is better experienced in our app.

The purpose of the three new bills that seek to replace the Indian Penal Code (1860), Criminal Procedure Code (1898) and Indian Evidence Act is not to punish but to give justice, Union Home Minister Amit Shah said 

Will Sedition law be repealed or will govt bring a harsher law to replace it | Explained 

Home Minister Amit Shah while tabling 3 bills in the Lok Sabha aimed at revamping the criminal laws in India said that the government is 'completely repealing' the sedition law. 

The purpose of the three new bills that seek to replace the Indian Penal Code (1860), Criminal Procedure Code (1898) and Indian Evidence Act is not to punish but to give justice, Union Home Minister Amit Shah said&nbsp;

Home Minister Amit Shah while tabling 3 bills in the Lok Sabha aimed at revamping the criminal laws in India said that the government is 'completely repealing' the sedition law.&nbsp;
Before detailing what the Home Minister told the Lok Sabha, let&rsquo;s look at a sedition report card and ask a consequent question.
The National Crime Records Bureau or NCRB started collecting data on sedition cases in the same year Prime Minister Narendra Modi came to power, which is 2014. &nbsp;
Since that year and till 2020, 399 sedition cases were filed across the country.
The year 2019 saw the highest number of sedition cases at 93.
73 cases, which is the second-highest number of cases in a year, were filed in 2020.
A major reading from the data is that these cases have a pendency rate between 76% to 93% in the courts.
'The British introduced sedition law to save their empire. I want to tell this House that in a historic decision, this govt is completely repealing sedition law. Completely repeal. This is a democracy... everyone has the right to speak. We are completely repealing sedition,' Amit Shah said in the Lok Sabha
'There was no provision for secession, armed rebellion, subversive activities, separatist activities, endangering sovereignty or unity and integrity of India. They were somehow fitted in but now there is,' he added.&nbsp;
The takeaway is that the sedition law, which most of the opponents of the BJP government claim is being misused, must go.
But the data too proves that the contentious law has been in vogue since 2014. &nbsp;Now to the consequent question: why would a government do away with a law that it has enforced to ensure our sovereignty is unharmed? &nbsp;
The larger attempt is that we will be saying goodbye to the British-era criminal laws of which sedition is part and its imposition was a badge of honour for India&rsquo;s freedom fighters.
A proper reading reveals that there isn&rsquo;t much to read- it is likely a very familiar case of name change.
In the Indian Penal Code, Section 124 deals with sedition, and under the proposed law Section 150 of &nbsp;Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, 2023 will deal with crimes covered under sedition.
Section 150 does not mention the word 'sedition' but provides for punishment for 'endangering sovereignty, unity and integrity of India.' &nbsp;So, the possible reason why we are given to believe that the sedition law would be revoked. &nbsp;
In reality, incumbently sedition draws a punishment of life imprisonment or imprisonment which may extend up to three years, but the new bill proposes life imprisonment or imprisonment which may extend to seven years for 'endangering sovereignty, unity and integrity of India.' &nbsp;
What is in the name, nothing and everything but in this case enhanced punishment

A Supreme Court bench, headed by the Chief Justice of India, has stayed all proceedings in sedition cases. What is sedition law, where did it come from in India, and is it time for it to go?

The India Story with Vikram Chandra: Time for sedition law to go after SC order?

Decoded | Sedition law: Time for 'colonial baggage' to go after SC order?

A Supreme Court bench, headed by the Chief Justice of India, has stayed all proceedings in sedition cases. What is sedition law, where did it come from in India, and is it time for it to go?

A Supreme Court bench, headed by the Chief Justice of India, has stayed all proceedings in sedition cases, and asked governments to not file any FIRs under the provision. This comes after the Central government had said that they will reconsider the law, as part of an effort to &lsquo;shed colonial baggage&rsquo;.
Which is great, but what is sedition?
The dictionary definition of the word is the use of words or action that are intended to encourage people to oppose the government.
Although the recent Supreme Court order has stayed this provision, sedition is defined under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code as both a non-bailable and cognisable offence.
Which means that the police can arrest any accused person without a warrant, and they would not be able to get bail until the case is closed. The recent SC order, however, allows any person currently booked under sedition to apply for bail.
Sedition is also a non-compoundable office, which meant that once charges are filed, they can not be withdrawn, and there can be no settlement. Any accused person had to go through the full trial.
Also Watch:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.editorji.com/story/decoded-can-judicial-reforms-enable-the-delivery-of-swift-justice-1652104540858">Decoded | Can judicial reforms enable the delivery of swift justice?</a>
<h2>History of Sedition Law</h2>
The government has called sedition &lsquo;colonial baggage&rsquo;, because it was added to the Indian Penal Code by the British in 1870.
Freedom fighter Balgangadhar Tilak was be convicted for sedition and was sent to jail for 18 months in 1897.
Mahatma Gandhi was also arrested for sedition by the British govt in 1922.
Sedition was originally also a part of the draft Indian constitution, as a restriction on freedom of speech and expression. In 1949, it was dropped from the Constitution but retained in the IPC.
In 1951, Prime Minister Nehru amended Article 19(1)(a) that guarantees fundamental rights, to put in &lsquo;reasonable restrictions&rsquo; on the right to free speech.
Then in 1974, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi made sedition cognisable offence and authorised police to make arrests without a warrant.
Also Watch:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.editorji.com/story/decoded-getting-a-foreign-degree-what-do-the-numbers-say-1652267453223" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Decoded | Getting a foreign degree: what do the numbers say?&nbsp;</a>
<h2>Who can be charged with sedition?</h2>
So, could anyone be charged with sedition? In 1962, the Supreme Court ruled that even strongly worded criticism of the government would be considered within the fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression.
There was, however, a catch. The Court did say that when words or actions have a destructive tendency, or the intent of creating disorder or disturbance, it can be called sedition.
But how exactly does one gauge the tendency or intention behind a word or action?
The vague wording of this order left scope for the government to slap any criticism with sedition, arguing that the words or actions have the tendency or intention to create disorder, or provoke disaffection against the govt.
The accused could approach the court for relief, but remember that this was a non-bailable and non-compoundable offence, and the burden of proof lay with the accused. The process, therefore, became the punishment.
The Chief Justice of India, NV Ramana, in 2021, had said that the law needs to go. He said that the law&rsquo;s conviction rate is very low, and its enormous power can be compared to a carpenter using a saw to cut an entire forest, instead of a tree.
So, are the Chief Justice&rsquo;s concerns about the misuse of sedition law well-founded?
A total of 326 cases were registered in the country under the sedition law between 2014 and 2019.
However, just six persons were convicted under the law, according to Home Ministry's recent data. For the rest, the process became punishment.
While we await the Central government&rsquo;s reconsideration of the sedition law, the point to be noted is that the United Kingdom, which gave India this law, scrapped it back in 2009.

Amid uncertain Covid protocols and dwindling job markets, is a foreign education still viable for Indian students? Vikram Chandra speaks to experts and students on the challenges faced by India’s youth abroad. 

The India Story Episode 6 | Is foreign education viable in a post-Covid world?

Amid uncertain Covid protocols and dwindling job markets, is a foreign education still viable for Indian students? Vikram Chandra speaks to experts and students on the challenges faced by India’s youth abroad.

Amid uncertain Covid protocols and dwindling job markets, is a foreign education still viable for Indian students? Vikram Chandra speaks to experts and students on the challenges faced by India&rsquo;s youth abroad.

India is home to one-fifth of the world&rsquo;s youth. India&rsquo;s student population has long looked to foreign Universities for a pathway to a better life abroad, or a leg up in the Indian job market. But since the onset of the Covid pandemic, fickle travel rules, uncertainty about covid protocols, and exorbitant fees have made life difficult for Indian students abroad. Add to that struggling economies and dwindling job markets, and the allure of a foreign education has been made uncertain.
Is a foreign education still viable in the post-Covid world? This week on The India Story, Vikram Chandra speaks to both experts and students about the current state of affairs on foreign education for Indian students.
Also Watch:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.editorji.com/story/the-india-story-episode-5-judicial-reforms-long-overdue-for-swift-justice-1651842674306" target="_blank">The India Story Episode 5 | Judicial reforms: Long overdue for swift justice?</a>
We also look at the Supreme Court&rsquo;s historic order on the sedition law, which has stayed the provision and directed governments to not file any new FIRs. Watch The India Story with Vikram Chandra, Fridays at 8 pm. Download the Editorji app: www.editorji.com/download

PDP leader Waheed Parra has perhaps become the first person to benefit from the Supreme Court putting on hold trial of cases under sedition law as the High Court for Jammum Kashmir and Ladakh granted him bail in an alleged militant conspiracy case filed by the NIA. The division bench listed the apex court ruling as one of the mitigating factors while allowing Para's appeal for bail. The HC noted that regarding the sedition charges, the issue is governed by the recent judgment of the Supreme Court whereby the apex court has directed that all the pending trials, appeals and proceedings with respect to the charge framed under Sedition law shall be kept in abeyance. While granting bail to Para against a surety of Rs 1 lakh, the court directed Para to present himself before the investigating officer as and when required to, surrender his passport to the investigating officer of the case and not leave Jammu and Kashmir without the prior permission of the trial court. 

PDP leader Waheed Parra gets bail: First person to benefit from SC's sedition law ruling

The division bench listed the apex court ruling as one of the mitigating factors while allowing Para's appeal for bail.

PDP leader Waheed Parra has perhaps become the first person to benefit from the Supreme Court putting on hold trial of cases under sedition law as the High Court for Jammu&nbsp;Kashmir and Ladakh granted him bail in an alleged militant conspiracy case filed by the NIA.&nbsp; The division bench listed the apex court ruling as one of the mitigating factors while allowing Para's appeal for bail. The HC noted that regarding the sedition charges, the issue is governed by the recent judgment of the Supreme Court whereby the apex court has directed that all the pending trials, appeals and proceedings with respect to the charge framed under&nbsp;Sedition law shall be kept in abeyance.
ALSO WATCH |<a href="https://www.editorji.com/editorji-specials/the-india-story/decoded-sedition-law-time-for-colonial-baggage-to-go-after-sc-order-1652457094532" target="_blank"> Sedition law explained: Time for 'colonial baggage' to go?</a> While granting bail to Para against a surety of Rs 1 lakh,&nbsp;the court directed Para to present himself before the investigating officer as and when required to, surrender his passport to the investigating officer of the case and not leave Jammu and Kashmir without the prior permission of the trial court.&nbsp;

As the Centre continues to defend Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the hearing on the constitutional validity of sedition law intensifies in the apex court.
The Supreme Court has questioned the need for the draconian law, which was brought in by the East India Company, even as India celebrated its 75th Independence anniversary.
Here's a look at the journey of the law in the Indian Constitution and the prominent freedom fighters who have been booked under it.
The sedition law was drafted by British historian-politician Thomas Babington Macaulay in the year 1837.
However, the law did not make it to the IPC until 1870. The British Colonial government brought the section under IPC to muzzle the writings and speeches of India freedom fighters like Mahatma Gandhi, Lokmanya Tilak, Bhagat Singh and others.
The first known case under the sedition law was registered in 1891. Jogendra Chandra Bose who was the then editor of newspaper named Bangobasi was booked for publishing an article criticizing the 'Age of Consent Bill'.
Two trials of Bal Gangadhar Tilak
The trial which reportedly changed the perception of Section 124A was that of Bal Gangadhar Tilak in 1897. The British government claimed that Tilak's speeches incited murder of two British officers in Pune. Justice James Strachey, presiding over the case, broadened the scope of sedition law by equating 'disaffection' to 'disloyalty.'Tilak was charged with sedition and spent one year in jail.
Strachey's interpretation led to the section being used repeatedly against nationalist leaders by the colonial government.
Tilak was charged again in 1908 for his seditious articles that provoked Khudiram Bose to use an explosive device that killed two English women.Tilak failed to prove his innocence and had to subsequently spend six years in imprisonment.
Interestingly, the judge who announced Tilak’s sentence in the second trial, Justice DD Davar, had represented him in his first trial in 1897.
In 1921, at the height of Khilafat movement, Maulana Mohammad Ali, Maulana Shaukat Ali and Shri Shankaracharya were tried jointly at Karachi for sedition.
In 1922, Gandhi was arrested on charges of sedition in Bombay for taking part in protests against the colonial government.He was sentenced to six years in prison but was released two years after his arrest due to medical reasons.Gandhi even termed Section 124A as the prince among the political sections of the IPC designed to suppress the liberty of the citizens.
Even the British were not spared from the sedition law.Another significant case on sedition was of Annie Besant which was registered in 1919. The English social reformer was tried for her seditious writings and the court ordered the confiscation of Besant's printing press.
Incidentally, the sedition charge was abolished by the United Kingdom in 2010.

Sedition law: freedom fighters who were booked under the draconian law

Sedition law: freedom fighters who have been booked under the draconian law

The first known case under the sedition law was registered in 1891.

As the Centre continues to defend Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the hearing on the constitutional validity of sedition law intensifies in the apex court.
The Supreme Court has questioned the need for the draconian law, which was brought in by the East India Company, even as India celebrated its 75th Independence anniversary.
Here's a look at the journey of the law in the Indian Constitution and the prominent freedom fighters who were booked under it.
The sedition law was drafted by British historian-politician Thomas Babington Macaulay in the year 1837.
However, the law did not make it to the IPC until 1870. The British Colonial government brought the section under IPC to muzzle the writings and speeches of India freedom fighters like Mahatma Gandhi, Lokmanya Tilak, Bhagat Singh and others.
The first known case under the sedition law was registered in 1891. Jogendra Chandra Bose who was the then editor of newspaper named Bangobasi was booked for publishing an article criticizing the 'Age of Consent Bill'.
Two trials of Bal Gangadhar Tilak
The trial which reportedly changed the perception of Section 124A was that of Bal Gangadhar Tilak in 1897.
The British government claimed that Tilak's speeches incited murder of two British officers in Pune.
Justice James Strachey, presiding over the case, broadened the scope of sedition law by equating 'disaffection' to 'disloyalty.'
Tilak was charged with sedition and spent one year in jail.
Strachey's interpretation led to the section being used repeatedly against nationalist leaders by the colonial government.
Tilak was charged again in 1908 for his seditious articles that provoked Khudiram Bose to use an explosive device that killed two English women.
Tilak failed to prove his innocence and had to subsequently spend six years in imprisonment.
Interestingly, the judge who announced Tilak&rsquo;s sentence in the second trial, Justice DD Davar, had represented him in his first trial in 1897.
In 1921, at the height of Khilafat movement, Maulana Mohammad Ali, Maulana Shaukat Ali and Shri Shankaracharya were tried jointly at Karachi for sedition.
In 1922, Gandhi was arrested on charges of sedition in Bombay for taking part in protests against the colonial government. He was sentenced to six years in prison but was released two years after his arrest due to medical reasons.
Gandhi even termed Section 124A as the prince among the political sections of the IPC designed to suppress the liberty of the citizens.
Incidentally, the sedition charge was abolished by the United Kingdom in 2010.

India's legal system is struggling. Judicial reforms are sorely needed to clear India’s legal logjam. Can long overdue reforms enable the delivery of swift justice?

Decoded | Can judicial reforms enable the delivery of swift justice?

India's legal system is struggling. Judicial reforms are sorely needed to clear India&rsquo;s legal logjam. Can long overdue reforms enable the delivery of swift justice?

India&rsquo;s legal system is struggling. Over 70,000 cases are pending before the Supreme Court, some for close to half a century. Nearly 76% of the country&rsquo;s prison population is made up of undertrials, according to a 2022 report. Despite high case pendency, thousands of judges&rsquo; posts lie vacant at all 3 tiers of the judiciary.
Judicial reforms are sorely needed to clear India&rsquo;s legal logjam. In this video,&nbsp;Vikram&nbsp;Chandra discusses how judicial reforms can propel The India Story. He also touches on four controversial laws which need to be reined in, including AFSPA, PMLA, UAPA, and the sedition law. The Centre has recently signaled its intent&nbsp;to reconsider &amp; re-examine the sedition law.
Also Watch:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.editorji.com/story/the-india-story-episode-5-judicial-reforms-long-overdue-for-swift-justice-1651842674306">The India Story Episode 5 | Judicial reforms: Long overdue for swift justice?</a>
&nbsp;

The Modi government has told the Supreme Court not to invest its time in examining the validity of Section 124A as it has decided to re-examine and reconsider the controversial Sedition Law.In an affidavit filed before the apex court, the government said that in tune with Prime Minister Narendra Modi's vision to shed colonial baggage at a time when the nation is marking its 75th year of independence, the Centre has decided to reconsider various colonial laws.The affidavit noted that the government is fully aware of various views being expressed on the subject of sedition and has also considered the concerns of civil liberties and human rights, while remaining committed to maintain and protect the sovereignty and integrity of India.The affidavit was filed in response to a batch petitions challenging the constitutionality of the Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code which criminalises the offence of sedition. 
In July last year, the Supreme Court had questioned the Centre on whether the sedition law was needed 75 years after independence.The Apex Court is currently considering whether the matter should be referred to a Constitution Bench.

Modi govt to re-examine & reconsider Sedition Law: report

Modi govt to re-examine &amp; reconsider Sedition Law: report

The affidavit was filed in response to a batch petitions challenging the constitutionality of the Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code which criminalises the offence of sedition.&nbsp;

The Modi government has told the Supreme Court not to invest its time in examining the validity of Section 124A as it has decided to re-examine and reconsider the controversial Sedition Law. In an affidavit filed before the apex court, the government said that in tune with Prime Minister Narendra Modi's vision to shed colonial baggage at a time when the nation is marking its 75th year of independence, the Centre has decided to reconsider various colonial laws. The affidavit noted that the government is fully aware of&nbsp;various views being expressed on the subject of sedition and has also considered the concerns of civil liberties and human rights, while remaining committed to maintain and protect the sovereignty and integrity of India. The affidavit was filed in response to a batch petitions challenging the constitutionality of the Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code which criminalises the offence of sedition.&nbsp;
Also watch: <a href="https://www.editorji.com/india-news/modi-govt-defends-sedition-law-in-supreme-court-amid-challenge-by-petitions-reports-1651936754002">Modi govt defends sedition law in Supreme Court amid challenge by petitions: reports</a>
In July last year, the&nbsp;Supreme Court had questioned the Centre on whether the sedition law was needed 75 years after independence. The Apex Court is currently considering whether the matter should be referred to a Constitution Bench.

The Union government defended the sedition law under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in the Supreme Court on May 7. The Narendra Modi administration submitted an affidavit defending the sedition law, citing past judgments of the top court.
The central government reportedly said that the judgment on sedition law in the Kedar Nath Singh v State of Bihar ruling is a good law and does not need reconsideration. The government further argued that a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court cannot examine the constitutional validity of the same provision.
Watch |&nbsp;India slides down to 150th position from 142nd in World Press Freedom Index
The government reportedly said that only a bench with the same strength as the one which passed the Kedar Nath judgment can pose any doubts on the earlier ruling.
The sedition law has been challenged by petitioners including the Editors' Guild of India, and TMC MP Mahua Moitra.

Modi govt defends sedition law in Supreme Court amid challenge by petitions: reports

The Union government defended the sedition law under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in the Supreme Court on May 7. The Narendra Modi administration submitted an affidavit defending the sedition law, citing past judgments of the top court.
The central government reportedly said that the judgment on sedition law in the Kedar Nath Singh v State of Bihar ruling is a good law and does not need reconsideration. The government further argued that a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court cannot examine the constitutional validity of the same provision.
The government reportedly said that only a bench with the same strength as the one which passed the Kedar Nath judgment can pose any doubts on the earlier ruling.
The sedition law has been challenged by petitioners including the Editors' Guild of India, and TMC MP Mahua Moitra.

Union government defended the sedition law in the Supreme court; government submitted affidavit citing past judgements of the top court

The Union government defended the sedition law under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in the Supreme Court on May 7. The Narendra Modi administration submitted an affidavit defending the sedition law, citing past judgments of the top court.
The central government reportedly said that the judgment on sedition law in the Kedar Nath Singh v State of Bihar ruling is a good law and does not need reconsideration. The government further argued that a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court cannot examine the constitutional validity of the same provision.
Watch |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.editorji.com/india-news/india-slides-down-to-150th-position-from-142nd-in-world-press-freedom-index-1651650952030" target="_blank">India slides down to 150th position from 142nd in World Press Freedom Index</a>
The government reportedly said that only a bench with the same strength as the one which passed the Kedar Nath judgment can pose any doubts on the earlier ruling.
The sedition law has been challenged by petitioners including the Editors' Guild of India, and TMC MP Mahua Moitra.

sedition law

Categories