LAWS(SC)-2023-3-107

ARUP BHUYAN Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

Decided On March 24, 2023
ARUP BHUYAN Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ASSAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present reference to the larger Bench is made against the judgment and order in the case of Arup Bhuyan vs. Union of India, (2011) 3 SCC 377 as well as State of Kerala vs. Raneef, (2011) 1 SCC 784, pursuant to the order passed by this Court dtd. 26/8/2014, reported as (2015) 12 SCC 702.

(2.) That the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Raneef (supra) whilst relying upon numerous American decisions concerning freedom of speech and position on membership of banned organizations rejected the doctrine of "guilt by association" and observed that mere membership of a banned organization will not incriminate a person unless he resorts to violence or incites people to violence and does an act intended to create disorder or disturbance of public peace by resort to violence. In paragraphs 10 to 14 this Court in the case of Raneef (supra) observed and held as under:

(3.) Shri Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General has also taken us to the background to the UAPA and the enactment of Article 19(1) and 19(4) of the Constitution of India vide Constitution (Sixteenth Amendment) Act, 1963. It is submitted that exception to the freedom to form associations under Article 19(1) was inserted in the form of sovereignty and integrity of India in Article 19(4), after the National Integration Council appointed a Committee on National Integration and Regionalisation. The said committee was to look into the aspect of putting reasonable restrictions in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India. It is submitted that pursuant to the acceptance of the recommendations of the Committee, the Constitution (Sixteenth Amendment) Act, 1963 was enacted to impose, by law, reasonable restrictions in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India. Article 19(1)(c) and 19(4) of the Constitution of India reads as follows: