Dear Editor Sub:- (i)- Delhi Police under legal obligation to book people only under law which are recognized and administered by judiciary (ii)- Bassi under legal obligation to ensure Delhi Police moves court under section 395 CrPC in order to bail out India from global embarrassment. -- I had approached Delhi Police Commissioner Bhim Sain Bassi twice from as distant place as Bengaluru about public interest criminal matters pertaining to Delhi and found to my pleasant surprise that Bassi was not only efficient and prompt in taking legally expected action to address those complaints but he is (a rare case in India) also a courteous police authority who kept me well informed about the action taken by Delhi Police. Hence I consider myself under obligation to help (especially when I believe I can) Bassi in coming out from the embarrassment and predicament he clearly finds himself in, caused by Delhi Police taking action under section 124 A IPC (related to sedition) against students of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) Delhi as given below:- (1)- First and foremost Bassi should know that Legislation is merely an Statute and does not become Law unless recognized and administered by Judiciary. This sedition law especially about matters related to J&K precisely comes under this fundamental principle of jurisprudence where this law is not being enforced in Kashmir (as Bassi interprets it during press interview). In Kashmir not only separatists but ordinary people, politicians, people’s representatives and even ministers issue statements and slogans which if Bassi’s interpretation of law of sedition is to be accepted then all these Kashmiris should be in Jail. Such so-called seditious matters in Kashmir has bearing on such matters in Delhi (especially when students, faculty and staff from J&K too are in JNU) hence under Article 226 (2) of Constitution the Delhi High Court has jurisdiction to entertain / adjudicate on such matters. [No doubt said inconsistency in implementing sedition laws in J&K on one hand and in other Indian States on other hand is mainly due to dereliction of Union of India which did not retrieve POK (even militarily). India is under delusion that mentioning in Constitution of J&K as integral part of India is enough without realizing that acquiescence and inordinate delay in retrieving POK damages Indian title on POK due to adverse possession. Especially when Pakistan much smaller than India tried to take kashmir militarily in 1947, 1948, 1965, 1971 during Kargil etc. At the top of it and to make matter worst the Indian military (instead of taking-on Pak military for retrieving POK) is showing its 'bravery' by training guns at civilians and Indian citizens of J&K especially in Kashmir valley under AFSPA etc. But then it should not be headache of - Bassi / Delhi Police which should be concerned only about proper implementation of criminal laws in Delhi] (2)- Apart from Kashmir factor in present age of IT revolution in social media similar so-called seditious materials do round 24x7 but governments (of Union and States of India) do not take action about it which is discrimination hence legally objectionable. (3)- Moreover there is problem about implementation of these sedition laws as happened in case of allegedly derogatory video of Prophet Mohammed which caused riots world over especially in Muslim countries hence Muslims were demanding USA should ban this video. But US President Obama (through his speech at UN General Assembly) refused to legally ban that video by saying that in present age of IT revolution with a click of finger on mobile or on computer / laptop such videos can be sent world over to millions and millions of people hence it is impractical to be sensitive on such matters and absurd to ask for any legal measure to stop such things. (4 )- Laws and interpretation of laws in ‘Rajtantra’ (rule of monarchs and kings) and ‘Prajatantra’ (democracy) are supposed to be different . Laws in ‘Rajtantra’ tend to be Statists which tend to make State larger than life and extra powerful but in democracy individual citizen is the purpose of law hence freedom of expression is given high importance in democracy unless sedition really results in or highly likely to result (again subjected to judicial review / scrutiny) in public violence (5)- Under fundamental rights the constitution under Article 14 guarantees equality before law and law inconsistent with fundamental right is void under Article 13 of Indian Constitution. Hence in view of above this sedition law under 124 A IPC deserve to be challenged and got repealed in its present form for which Bassi / Delhi Police should move lower court (hearing this sedition case) under section 395 CrPC for sending reference to High Court / Supreme Court for clarification about and repeal of this Sedition law in its present form. Because this sedition case about JNU has now become a comedy [where after statement of Union Home Minister (allegedly based on intelligence inputs) linking this JNU sedition episode with Pak terrorists (the mastermind of 26/11 Hafiz Saeed etc) not only national political parties (which had been in Union govt at times) like Congress, CPM, CPI etc but entire premier institution of higher learning as JNU have been absurdly branded as anti-national unpatriotic and having links with Pak terrorists etc ] it is hoped Bassi will ensure that Delhi Police moves court under section 395 CrPC in order to bail out India from this global embarrassment. Regards Hem Raj Jain (Author of ‘Betrayal of Americanism’) Bengaluru, India