Speaking against the nation should not be camouflaged as free speech.

Sedition,  as in the Indian constitution, the term is defined as words, signs or visible representation that brings or attempts to bring hatred, contempt towards the government established by law of India whereas sedition in the American constitution limits the definition to just actions of dissent that bring hatred and contempt towards the nation. And so the "protectors" of free speech argue why does our definition exceed to words and speech. Well, to answer this I would like to bring people's awareness to the elements of conspiracy -
1. an agreement of two or more people to commit a crime in the future,
2. it is driven by influence.
When we talk of influence, how easy it is for our poverty- stricken and illiterate population to fall for militancy when even heinous crimes in the society are influenced by Bollywood movies. However, however, the Bollywood movies cannot be accused of creating conspiracy as intention too is an element of conspiracy.
Regarding the JNU case, why shouldnt Afzal Guru sympathisers be accused of sedition when the apex court(the judiciary -organ of the government established by law of India) has long convicted and punished Afzal Guru by decaring him a terrorist. Lets not turn the debate over anti nationalism to another direction and rather fasten up the process to convict those guilty. Lets have an opinion. Lets be active citizens and not passive entities getting carried away by opinions of others for if you dont interfere in politics, politics will interfere in your life.