The Allahabad High Court ruled that merely supporting Pakistan, without any anti-India content, does not attract Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), emphasizing the importance of free speech and cautioning against the misuse of sedition-like provisions.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
UTTAR PRADESH: In a recent interpretation of the newly introduced Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the Allahabad High Court observed that expressing support for Pakistan, without referencing any specific incident or India, does not prima facie constitute an offence under the provision.
The ruling came in response to a bail application filed by an 18-year-old who had been arrested for posting an Instagram reel stating,
“Chahe jo ho jai sport to bas…Pakistan ka karenge”
(Whatever happens, we will support only Pakistan).
The prosecution invoked Section 152 BNS, alleging that the post endangered national integrity and promoted separatism.
Section 152 BNS criminalises “Acts that endanger the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India”, through spoken or written words, signs, visible representations, or electronic communications promoting secession, armed rebellion, subversive activities, or any form of separatism.
This is a new provision under the BNS and has no direct equivalent in the IPC (Indian Penal Code), thus requiring careful interpretation.
Court’s Observation
A single-judge Bench of Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal ruled that,
“Merely showing support to Pakistan without referring to any incident or mentioning India does not attract Section 152 BNS.”
The Bench further clarified that such a message might anger Indian citizens and could fall under Section 196 BNS, which deals with speech that incites disharmony, but does not meet the threshold for invoking Section 152.
The Court emphasised that:
- Free speech on social media must not be narrowly interpreted.
- There must be clear intent to promote secession or harm national unity for Section 152 to apply.
- Law enforcement should adopt the standard of a “reasonable, strong-minded person” before registering cases over online content.
The High Court invoked a recent Supreme Court ruling affirming that,
“Freedom of thought and expression remains a foundational pillar of the Indian Constitution.”
It further noted that police officers must uphold constitutional values and not act based on public outrage or emotional sentiments. The Court said,
“Police Officers being citizens, are bound to abide by the Constitution. We are bound to honour and uphold freedom of speech and expression conferred to all citizens. It is further observed by the Apex Court that before registering a case regarding a post on social media, it should be looked into as a reasonable man and decision should be based on standards of reasonable, strong-minded, firm and courageous individuals and not based on standards of people with weak and oscillating minds.”
The Court granted bail to the applicant, finding:
- No content in the reel directly disrespected India;
- No use of the Indian flag, mention of Indian institutions, or display of insulting imagery;
- No seditious or separatist intent.
However, the Court warned the applicant not to post material that may incite disharmony in the future.
Section 152 of BNS
The Rajasthan High Court’s recent judgment in Tejender Pal Singh v. State of Rajasthan (2024) has sparked serious concerns regarding the potential misuse of Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
Although the BNS does not explicitly refer to sedition, the broad and ambiguous language of Section 152 raises fears that it could be used to suppress legitimate dissent and criticism, mirroring the misuse of the now-repealed Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Difference between Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS):
Section 124A IPC, which defines the offence of sedition, criminalizes any act, whether spoken, written, or by signs, that brings or attempts to bring into hatred, contempt, or disaffection against the government established by law in India.
It was often criticised for being vague and overly broad, allowing for the suppression of political dissent and criticism. It focused on sentiments against the government
In contrast, Section 152 BNS removes the term “sedition” but introduces a new offence that targets acts which endanger the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India. This includes purposely or knowingly inciting secession, armed rebellion, or subversive and separatist activities through speech, writing, electronic communication, or even financial means.
Section 152 is directed at actions threatening the nation itself. Importantly, Section 152 carries a broader punishment, up to life imprisonment or seven years, along with a fine, and explicitly includes electronic and financial communication.
Case Title: Riyaz v State
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 22915 of 2025
READ ATTACHMENT HERE