Daily Current Affairs MCQ: 10th January 2025 - Bank Exams MCQ

The primary aim of the Pravasi Bharatiya Divas (PBD) is to honor the contributions of the Indian diaspora to their homeland. This event seeks to strengthen the engagement between the Indian community living abroad and the Indian government, while also helping them reconnect with their roots. Observed on January 9, PBD commemorates the return of Mahatma Gandhi to India from South Africa, symbolizing the importance of the Indian diaspora in the nation's development and progress. An interesting fact is that the first PBD was celebrated in 2003, and it has since become a significant event held every two years, showcasing the contributions of overseas Indians.

The GDP growth rate for India is projected to be 6.4% for the fiscal year 2024-25, which marks a decline from the previous year's growth rate of 8.2%. This indicates a slowing economy, prompting discussions among economists regarding the underlying factors affecting economic performance. Understanding GDP growth rates is crucial as they reflect the overall economic health and influence policy decisions. Interestingly, a consistent decline in GDP growth can lead to increased unemployment and reduced consumer confidence, emphasizing the need for strategic interventions.

The Rajasthan High Court expressed concerns that Section 152 of the BNS could be misused to suppress valid criticism and peaceful dissent. This section's vague definitions may lead to its application against individuals expressing dissenting opinions, much like how sedition laws have been historically used. The court emphasized the need for judicial oversight to prevent the abuse of this provision, protecting the essential freedom of speech in a democratic society. An interesting fact is that the debate surrounding sedition and related laws is ongoing in many democracies, reflecting the tension between national security and individual liberties.

Section 124A of the IPC specifically targets acts that cause hatred or contempt towards the government, which is termed as sedition. This section is particularly focused on inciting disaffection against the authority of the government, indicating that any action that undermines governmental respect can lead to severe legal consequences. It is important to note that the implications of sedition are serious, as they can affect freedom of speech and expression, raising debates about individual rights versus national security.

Section 152 of the IPC differs significantly from Section 124A regarding the intent requirement. While Section 124A necessitates proof of intent to incite disaffection, Section 152 allows for prosecution if a person "knowingly" shares information that could incite rebellion or separatism, regardless of malicious intent. This broader language creates a more flexible framework for prosecution, which can lead to concerns about potential overreach in applying the law, especially in cases where individuals may not have intended to cause harm.

Under Section 152 of the IPC, the potential penalties are significantly severe, with provisions for life imprisonment or imprisonment for up to seven years, along with mandatory fines. This reflects the section's emphasis on safeguarding the sovereignty and integrity of India, indicating that the law takes threats to national security very seriously. The harsher penalties compared to Section 124A highlight the legislative intent to deter actions that could jeopardize the country’s stability and integrity.

Section 124A of the IPC specifically criminalizes acts that cause hatred or contempt towards the government, focusing on inciting disaffection. This means that any actions or expressions that could lead to a loss of loyalty or support for the government can be prosecuted under this section. An interesting fact is that the concept of sedition laws has a long history, being used by various nations to suppress dissent and maintain governmental authority, often leading to debates about the balance between security and freedom of expression.

Section 152 lowers the requirement for intent, allowing for prosecution if an individual "knowingly" shares information that might incite rebellion or separatism, even without malicious intent. This contrasts with Section 124A, which explicitly requires proof of intent to incite disaffection. This difference raises concerns about the implications for free speech, as it can lead to individuals being prosecuted for sharing information without the intention of causing harm or rebellion.

Section 152 of the IPC prescribes severe penalties, which can include life imprisonment or imprisonment for up to seven years, along with mandatory fines. This makes it a more stringent law compared to Section 124A, which has a minimum imprisonment term of three years. The harsh penalties under Section 152 reflect the seriousness with which the law treats acts that could endanger the sovereignty and integrity of the country, emphasizing the state's commitment to maintaining national security.

Section 152 employs broader language that can criminalize acts jeopardizing the sovereignty and integrity of India without explicitly labeling them as sedition. This contrasts with Section 124A, which explicitly addresses acts that incite disaffection towards the government. The broader wording in Section 152 allows for a wider range of actions to be prosecuted, which can lead to significant implications for civil liberties and the scope of governmental authority in regulating speech and actions that might threaten national unity.