Supreme Court Asks Two UP Journalists To Avail Alternate Remedies Against FIR Over Articles On Caste Discrimination

The Supreme Court today(Wednesday) disposed of two writ petitions filed by journalists from Uttar Pradesh, Abhishek Upadhyay and Mamta Tripathi, seeking protection against the FIRs registered against him after he published an Article identifying people of a particular caste who were deployed in responsible positions in the State. Following the publication of the said Article and also after he posted the story on X(formerly Twitter), an FIR was registered against him in 2024. However, it continued the interim protection against arrest for four weeks to allow the parties to seek appropriate remedies. 

Last year, a bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and S.V. N Bhatti ordered that no coercive steps should be taken against the petitioner Upadhyay in connection with the concerned Article titled 'Caste Dynamics of the General Administration'. 

The Court had observed: "In democratic nations, freedom to express one's views are respected. The rights of journalists are protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. Merely because writings of a journalist are perceived as criticism of the Government, criminal cases should not be slapped against the writer."

While so, another writ petition was filed by journalist Tripathi seeking interim protection from arrest in connection with articles alleging caste discrimination in the administration of the Uttar Pradesh government. The Court also granted interim protection and tagged it with Upadhyay's matter.

Today when both matters came up before a bench of Justices MM Sundresh and Rajesh Bindal, Justice Bindal suggested that the parties should go to the High Court. Advocate Amarjit Singh Bedi, for Tripathi, submitted that multiple FIRs are being registered against the order of the Supreme Court. He added that there are in total of 4 FIRs in which the charges pertains to hurting religious sentiments but chargesheet has not been filed. 

"I had actually filed a quashing petition before the High Court, that is also before mylords, was dismissed. The Court was of the view that trial has to take place. That is also coming up," Bedi said.

Justice Bindal added that the question is of the writ petition and if SLP is filed, the Court will consider it. But Article 32 cannot be filed and complainant has not been made a party to the proceedings.

The Court however said its not inclined to entertain the writ petition. It added that the interim protection for four weeks can continue.

"We are not inclined to entertain. However, interim protection of four weeks to the petitioner to enable him to take appropriate remedy. Interim order"

Case Details: ABHISHEK UPADHYAY v. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR|W.P.(Crl.) No. 402/2024 and others