A contempt petition has been filed before the Supreme Court over the Delhi Police's alleged detention and forcible removal of journalists covering protests demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar. [Free Speech Collective v. Union of India and Others]
The plea filed by Free Speech Collective, an association working to protect press freedom and freedom of expression, alleges wilful disobedience of the top court’s October 11, 2026 order directing that lawyers, journalists and other professionals shall not be hindered in discharge of their professional duties in any manner whatsoever.
The plea has sought contempt action for the alleged breach, identification of the police officers and supervising officials responsible and disclosure of how the Court’s direction was communicated to personnel deployed on the ground.
The association has separately filed a writ petition seeking an independent inquiry into alleged police violence against journalists and binding guidelines governing police interaction with reporters during protests.
According to the contempt plea, journalists continued to be detained and removed from reporting locations at RK Ashram Marg, Connaught Place and elsewhere even after the Court’s direction, despite identifying themselves as members of the press.
The petitions refer to journalists associated with Scroll, Newslaundry, Reuters, Business Standard, BOOMLive, India Today, The News Minute, Maktoob Media, The Indian Express, PTI, The Quint, The Hindu, Peek TV, Reporter TV, 24 News and Asianet News.
The contempt plea cites the alleged detention of Nidhi Suresh of The News Minute, who was taken away in a police vehicle and remained detained until about 6:30 pm. It also refers to three Indian Express Hindi journalists - Shashwat, Siya and Vijay - who were allegedly detained at Connaught Place and taken to Chhatrasal Stadium despite displaying press identification.
No specific legal provision or individual reason was cited for their detention, the plea claims.
The petition cites reports attributing some detentions to police “confusion” and journalists working “too close” to protesters. It contends that these explanations disclose no lawful basis for detention.
The separate writ petition seeks an independent, time-bound inquiry, action against those responsible and consideration of compensation. It also seeks preservation of CCTV footage, police recordings and detention records.
The association argues that press freedom extends beyond publication to gathering and recording news and that removing journalists from reporting locations undermines the public’s right to know.
Both petitions were filed through Advocate Aarthi Rajan.