To my mind expression of one's views is a fundamental right enshrined in our Constitution and like any other right it is also circumscribed by certain exceptions with all logical compulsions in the absence of which a right might degenerate into a 'licence' to indulge in mindless exercise of this right. Now coming to the substantive issue of seditious expression which desirably should be discouraged and punished, leaves a lot of ground for subjective interpretation.What has been interpreted by the Chattisgarh Administration in implicating Dr. Vinayak Sen provides a classic example where the State Authorities have gone overboard in framing case of sedition when there exists none as has been so aptly explained and commented upon by the learned Judege of the Supreme Court that mere possession of Gandhiji's book does not make one a Gandhian nor does possession of Marxist literature make one a Communist!

I agree with chinmoy that mere belief in an ideology may be Marxist,Maoist or anything else constitutes no offence. But active participation in any unlawful activities constitute criminal breach of law. The Maoists have declared war against the state. This s obviously sedition. Actively supporting such cause amounts to sedition. The supreme court just allowed bail to Dr. Sen. Moreover, court decides on basis of evidence. In absence of sufficient evidence, benefit of doubt goes to accused.

As regards Arundhati Roy, she only made some speeches. Therew is no allegation of active support to any unlawful activities. So, she is on more sound footing.

@Gulshan

If you examine the case of Dr. Sen the Apex Court's decision to grant him bail is impregnant with a lot of messages for the lower court which is trying him for sedition.And in the backdrop of Supeme Court's decision the case of sedition stands on an infirm ground as the highest court has underlined the need for a new definition of the term 'sedition'! Interestingly even the Union Law Minister has come out with the opinion that the concept of sedtion which is founded on the British Rulers' view of things in this regard, needs to change and has requested the Law Commission to have fresh look at it.Let us see how things shape up from now on.

In the case of Sen I read he was accused as Mao friendly due to some leaflets and books got from his home.I used to buy many books of different readers and the leaflets that some offer.On a fine day if these parties are banned how I becomes a culprit?

@Gulshan

If you examine the case of Dr. Sen the Apex Court's decision to grant him bail is impregnant with a lot of messages for the lower court which is trying him for sedition.And in the backdrop of Supeme Court's decision the case of sedition stands on an infirm ground as the highest court has underlined the need for a new definition of the term 'sedition'! Interestingly even the Union Law Minister has come out with the opinion that the concept of sedtion which is founded on the British Rulers' view of things in this regard, needs to change and has requested the Law Commission to have fresh look at it.Let us see how things shape up from now on.

I had also seen apex court Decision. 'Sedition' as understood in British era is not relevant now and this needs change. During British period, anything that went against government policy was sedition. But even then, the term 'sedition' cannot be allowed to remain vague and should be properly defined and strictly construed so as to safeguard our national interests. To my mind, opposing government policy and seeking reforms through any means is not sedition. But subverting the parliamentary system and declaring war against state/ Government must be considered 'sedition'. Maoists have declared war against Indian state. This is sedition. If anyone actively colludes with the, he is guilty of sedition. It appears that in case of Dr. Sen, the Chhatisgarh police framed him without adequate proof.

In the case of Sen I read he was accused as Mao friendly due to some leaflets and books got from his home.I used to buy many books of different readers and the leaflets that some offer.On a fine day if these parties are banned how I becomes a culprit?

I also read book by che Guevera and some other revolutionaries. We cannot keep our self aloof from any ideas. Even the Maoists have the right to express themselves and there is nothing wrong to read or listen to them. If there is better understanding, the true nature of Maoist methods will be opposed more. You cannot fight any ideology by banning. We can fight Maoism and Naxalism ideologically. If we just refuse to listen to what they say, we shall only display our weakness.

The supreme court has decided in Dr. Sen's case that mere possession of literature does not amount to sedition. The court state that if you possess Mahatama Gandhi's book, you are not a Gandhian. Similarly, possessing book of Mao will not make you Maoist.