'Being A Journalist Doesn’t Mean You Have The License To Take Law Into Your Own Hands': Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Wednesday orally remarked that a journalist or a reporter doesn’t have the license to take the law into their own hands. The Court made the observation while hearing a plea by a journalist who was denied anticipatory bail by the Madhya Pradesh High Court.

The case of the journalist was that he was trying to expose a racket involving the illegal sale and purchase of a new born child. However, an FIR was registered against him alleging that he sought illegal gratification to suppress the news.

The journalist claimed that he is an accredited correspondent and that he published a news item in the Dainik Bhaskar on 26/07/2021 exposing a racket involving illegal sale of a new born child and as a counter blast one of the accused in the case registered a case against him and others. 

The Apex Court had previously granted interim protection against arrest to the petitioner and other journalists. However, on Wednesday a division bench of Justice A S Bopanna and Justice M M Sundresh observed that the petitioner was no longer entitled to the interim protection. The Court also observed that the petitioners were involved in other cases as well.

“At the outset we note, this Court while directing notice to the respondents on 28.11.2022 had granted interim protection against the arrest of the petitioners herein. At this stage, we have the benefit of the counter statement filed on behalf of the state. Though at this stage we will not go into the nature of allegations, the petitioners are also involved in other cases, we see no reason to continue the interim protection granted by this Court. Further, as per the learned counsel for the State, the investigation against the petitioners has been completed. That being the position, whether there is a need to take the petitioners into custody is a matter to be considered by the investigating officer.” the Court dictated in its order.

During the hearing the counsel for the petitioner argued that “As per the allegations, the ransom made was for 50 lakh rupees and the amount paid for was only 50,000. That is the unbelievable statement made by the complainant in the FIR. “

“Nothing is believable or unbelievable these days” Justice Bopanna remarked on a lighter vein.

The petitioners had approached the Apex Court against the order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court denying anticipatory bail.

The Objector had opposed the plea of the journalists and other applicants before the High Court stating that they were not involved in discharge of their pious obligation as journalists but were in fact running a racket of black mailing people to extract undue advantage for themselves.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court in its order had observed:

“….it is evident that allegations which have been made against the applicant are not pertaining to the discharge of duties of the applicant as a journalist or a accredited reporter for a newspaper. If any oblique act is performed under the garb/shadow of professed profession that cannot be given protection.”

Case Title: Sadaqat Pathan V. State of Madhya Pradesh and connected matters, SLP(Crl) No. 8885/2022