📢 Too many exams? Don’t know which one suits you best? Book Your Free Expert 👉 call Now!
  • google app store apple app store
    • ✖

      Question

      Under Section 152 of the BNS, 2023, T delivers a public

      speech at a rally advocating for a separate state carved out from an existing state, arguing that the current administrative structure is inefficient for the region's development. T explicitly states: "We should pursue this through constitutional amendments and democratic processes, petitioning the Government and Parliament for reorganization." T distributes pamphlets outlining economic, administrative, and cultural reasons for this proposal. However, he never advocates for violence, armed rebellion, or extra-constitutional means. The state authorities charge T under Section 152 for endangering national integrity. Which of the following correctly applies Section 152 to this scenario?
      A T is liable under Section 152 because advocating for separation of any region is inherently criminal regardless of the means proposed Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
      B T is not liable under Section 152 because his advocacy was explicitly limited to constitutional and democratic processes without exciting armed rebellion or subversive activities, falling within the Explanation's protected category Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
      C T is liable under Section 152 only if the audience that received his speech numbered more than 100; smaller gatherings are covered under civil disobedience provisions Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
      D T is liable under Section 152 because advocating for statehood reorganization is a per se endangerment of sovereignty, irrespective of his stated commitment to legality Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
      E T's liability under Section 152 depends entirely on whether the political party he represents has been designated as a secessionist organization by the Government Correct Answer Incorrect Answer

      Solution

      Explanation: Section 152 of the BNS, 2023 provides: "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." However, the Explanation provides a critical safeguard: "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 [are not an offence]." T's speech falls squarely within this protected category. His advocacy was for constitutional reorganization, not secession or armed rebellion. His explicit commitment to democratic and lawful processes distinguishes his speech from the criminal conduct Section 152 targets. The provision criminalizes acts that excite or attempt to excite rebellion or subversive activities, not mere proposals for administrative reorganization. The distinction is between advocating change within constitutional frameworks versus inciting unconstitutional upheaval. Thus, option (B) correctly applies the Explanation to protect T's legitimate political expression.

      Practice Next
      More Other Laws and Acts Questions
      ask-question