Supreme Court Grants 2 Months Protection To 'The Wire' Journalists From 3 UP Police FIRS; Asks Them To Move HC For Quashing

The Supreme Court on Wednesday granted two months protection to the "The Wire" and three of its reporters from three FIRs registered against them by the Uttar Pradesh Police over some of the reports published by the portal.

However, the Supreme Court said that to entertain the matter directly will open a "Pandora's Box" and asked them to approach the High Court for quashing the FIRs.

"We are aware of fundamental rights and don't want freedom of press to be muzzled", the presiding judge Justice L Nageswara Rao said, while adding that the journalists should have approached the High Court first than coming to the Supreme Court directly.

A bench comprising Justices L Nageswara  Rao, BR Gavai and BV Nagarathna was hearing a writ petition filed by Foundation for Independent Journalism (the company which owns "The Wire") and journalists Seraj Ali, Mukul Singh Chauhan and Ismat Ara. The petition sought to quash 3 FIRs registered against them by the UP Police over some of the reports published by "The Wire".

When the matter was taken, the bench asked Senior Advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan, who appeared for the petitioners, why the High Court was not approached.

"Why Writ Petition & why don't you file an application under (Section) 482?", Justice Nageswara Rao asked.

Ramakrishnan pointed out that there are three FIRs filed against the petitioners for doing their journalistic work.

"You can file an application before the High Court and we can grant you some interim protection. Because what will happen is, this will open a Pandora's box. We cannot take up all the cases here", Justice Rao said,

Ramakrishnan agreed to approach the High Court but prayed for interim protection.

The bench permitted the petitioners to withdraw the petition with liberty to approach the High Court and granted them protection for two months from the FIRs.

The FIRs were filed with respect to the following reports of 'The Wire':

1. Report about the death of a farmer-protester during the Republic Day march and the allegations of his family members that he was killed in a police gunfire.
2. Report about the attack on an old Muslim man at Ghaziabad
3. Report about the demolition of a mosque at Barabanki.

With regard to the above reports, FIRs were lodged at the police stations of Rampur, Ghaziabad and Barabanki respectively, alleging that false and alarming news reports were published to cause communal disharmony. Offences under Sections 153, 153-A,153-B, 505  of the IPC were invoked in the FIR.

The writ petition filed through Advocate Shadan Farasat stated that the reports related to matters on record and in public domain, and the FIRs were an attempt to muzzle the freedom of press. The petition stated that with respect to the Rampur FIR, the police had summoned the Chief Editor Siddharth Varadarajan.

"No part of the matter published is even remotely an offence, although it may be unpalatable to the government or some people. No unrest ever resulted or was likely to result on account of the concerned news reports. The fundamental assumption in these FIRs is that The Wire and its journalists have reported what they have with the intent to foment communal disharmony. To posit reporting – especially the verbatim claims of citizens who are or say they are victims of crime – as tending to create disharmony or as an inherently criminal act is most pernicious, and this mode of criminalising expression deserves relief and remedial measures from this Hon'ble Court, else no journalist will be able to report fearlessly and the media will become caught in the criminal process for simply doing its job", the plea stated.

The petitioners argued that the  the criminal proceedings initiated against them amount to an abuse of the due process of law, and they also severely curtail the their right to free speech and expression, as well as that of carrying on their profession of journalism.

As far as possible the alternate view of the administration is sought, and, if given, published, the petitioners pointed out.

They contended that state cannot attribute criminality to reporting of social wrongs and injustices.

"Such acts of the State pose a direct threat to not only freedom of expression, but also the rule of the law. This is policing of the media, and therefore calls for intervention at the highest level", the petition stated.

The petitioners further said that the Supreme Court has taken note of the issue of abuse of criminal law against journalists and has spoken of the need to properly define the contours of provisions such as S. 153-A and 505 IPC in the cases filed by two TV channels from Andhra Pradesh. Since the Supreme Court is already seized of that issue, the petitioners submitted that they thought it fit to approach the Supreme Court at the first instance.

Click Here To Read/ Download Order