On Tuesday, a Delhi court granted bail to Bengaluru’s climate activist Disha Ravi, 10 days after she was arrested for her alleged role in the creation and dissemination of a ‘toolkit’ for an ongoing protest against India’s farm laws that was tweeted by Swedish activist Greta Thunberg. The Delhi Police had accused the 22-year-old of being a key conspirator in the production of an online document that it claimed had links with a secessionist movement and was therefore a threat to the nation. Ravi was slapped with charges of sedition and criminal conspiracy. The court’s judge Dharmender Rana, however, dismissed the prosecution’s contention for its “scanty" evidence and ordered her release. While sighs of relief were heaved among citizens who care for the rule of law, details of the court’s order deserve a spotlight of their own for the example they set of how the presumption of innocence must prevail as a principle and how repeal-worthy colonial-era laws such as sedition should be interpreted. At a time when law-enforcers display a proclivity to summon our harshest legal provisions to criminalize and muzzle dissent with alarming frequency, the ruling reaffirms the inviolability of our cherished freedoms and draws a red line for state authority.
Especially notable was the clarity with which the order in Ravi’s favour struck a blow on behalf of our rights to free expression, non- violent dissent and free association, all of which are vital to democracy. “The offence of sedition cannot be invoked to minister to the wounded vanity of governments," the court said. This is a significant pushback, given the alacrity with which politicians in power tend to brand their critics as “anti-national". Far too often has India’s ruling dispensation sought to conflate the country with itself. The court also extolled those who raise their voice. “Citizens are conscience keepers of government in any democratic nation. They cannot be put behind bars simply because they choose to disagree with state policies," said the order, adding that “an aware and assertive citizenry, in contradistinction with an indifferent or docile citizenry, is indisputably a sign of a healthy and vibrant democracy." As for the absurdity of guilt imputed through association, it clarified that anyone may have interacted with someone of “dubious credentials"; “As long as the engagement/interaction remains within the four corners of law, persons interacting with such persons, ignorantly, innocently, or for that matter even fully conscious of their dubious credentials, cannot be painted with the same hue."
Welcome as this enunciation of principles is, justice in the country would mean little if they are not applied equally to all cases. On this score, of equality under the law, India seems in need of course correction. Many protesters languish in lock-ups on allegations that, prima facie, seem as flaky as those levelled against Ravi. Parallels have also been drawn with the case of Safoora Zargar, a student who was pregnant when arrested last year and spent weeks behind bars before she got bail. She too was charged with a grave offence, though the public record of her actions suggests all she did was protest a discriminatory law on citizenship. As the Delhi court observed on Tuesday, we need to value our diversity of views, just as we have for millennia. To make this point, it cited a Rig Veda verse: “Let noble thoughts come from all directions." Indeed.
Click here to read the Mint ePaperMint is now on Telegram. Join Mint channel in your Telegram and stay updated with the latest business news.