E-Paper
Journalist held for article on UP government gets SC relief from arrest
Criticism of the government cannot invite criminal action against journalists, the Supreme Court said on Friday.
Criticism of the government cannot invite criminal action against journalists, the Supreme Court said on Friday as it protected a Lucknow-based journalist from arrest after he apprehended arrest for an article accusing the Uttar Pradesh government of favouring officers of one caste in matters of administrative appointments.
Deciding a petition filed by the journalist Abhishek Upadhyay, a bench of justices Hrishikesh Roy and SVN Bhatti said, “Merely because writings of a journalist are perceived as criticism of the government, criminal cases should not be slapped against the writer.”
Seeking response of the state government on his petition within four weeks, the bench said, “In democratic nations, freedom to express one’s views are respected. The rights of the journalists are protected under Article 19(1)(a).”
Advocate Anoop Prakash appearing for Upadhyay pointed out that ever since the article titled “Yadav Raj versus Thakur Raj” has been posted on social media platform X, the petitioner has been subjected to threats, abuses, and that based on a complaint filed by a man named Pankaj Kumar, a first information report (FIR) has been lodged against him for hate speech (Section 353), statements prejudicial to integrity of the country (Section 197(1)(c)), hurting religious sentiments (Section 302), and defamation (Section 356) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS) and section 66 of the Information Technology Act.
The bench noted that the petitioner had even included UP chief minister Yogi Adityanath as one of the parties in his petition. The court asked him if it was necessary following which Upadhyay’s lawyer agreed to delete CM’s name. The court observed that the petition has been filed apprehending arrest for publishing an article “with casteist tilt” on officers deployed in responsible positions in the state.
“The petitioner is being targeted and since the story was posted on X (formerly Twitter), it might result in multiple other FIRs. Issue notice....In the meantime, coercive steps should not be taken against the petitioner in connection with the subject article,” the bench ordered.
In his article, Upadhyay claimed that under Adityanath, the state was witnessing the dominance of Thakurs in the higher echelons of the state administration. He drew a parallel of this trend with the administration under the tenure of former CM and Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav where Yadavs were increasingly seen ascending to positions of power in the state.
Awasthi argued that the FIR filed against the journalist contained offences which could not be proved in the present case as the article was an exposition of the journalist’s thoughts on the subject. The article had even named the officers concerned, questioning why a particular caste was being given preference in all these appointments.
