chandigarh a local court in sirsa while granting bail to five sirsa farmers booked under sedition charges section 124a of indian penal code by the haryana police for allegedly attacking haryana deputy speaker ranbir singh gangwas car observed that the commission of sedition in the present case is doubtfulaccording to the judge at most the offence of attempt to commit culpable homicide section 308 of ipc not amounting to murder can be imposed in the present caseafter hearing rival contentions i have given my thoughtful consideration to the same the commission of the offence of sedition under section 124a of ipc in the present case is doubtful as pointed out by counsel for the applicants i am satisfied with the contention of counsel for the applicants that at the most offence under section 308 attempt to commit culpable homicide ipc is attracted in the present case observed rajesh malhotra sirsa sessions judgehe passed these orders while granting bail to five farmers sahab singh daljit singh balkar singh mitta singh and balkaur singh all residents of different villages in haryanas sirsa districtthese farmers were booked on july 11 by sirsa police on the complaint of sushil kumar duty magistratecumdistrict welfare officer sirsa his main allegations were that these farmers had attacked the vehicle of the haryana deputy speaker and had raised slogans against the government an fir was registered under various sections of ipc including an attempt to murder section 307 and sedition section 124a of ipc the fir was registered against farm leaders including harcharan singh panjuana prahlad singh bharukhera and around 90100 unknown protestersstrongly objecting to the bail plea filed by these farmers the public prosecutor opposed the application for regular bail on the ground that present applicants along with other unknown persons had committed the heinous offence of sedition against the state government and had also made an attempt to eliminate deputy speaker ranbir singh gangwa by throwing stones injuring cops and damaging his official car he submitted that even though the present applicants are not named in the fir they are clearly visible in the various videoshowever the counsel representing the farmers submitted that they had been falsely implicated and the case of sedition is not attracted in the present case as there is nothing on record that said the incident could have led to the overthrow of the state government but section 124a ipc was added to increase the gravity of the alleged offence it was also submitted that the serious charges of sedition cannot be invoked in every situation without there being any reasonable threat to the state governmentthe farmers counsel also said that the state machinery was aware of the farmers protest and their warning that they would not allow any political function in the university despite that the deputy speaker visited the university to incite the feelings of the protesting farmers which led to the incident the counsel also said that the protesters were not carrying any arms to harm any person but