Supreme Court grants relief to journalist booked in SC/ST case after she accused cop of sexual harassment

The Supreme Court on Thursday granted interim protection to a journalist booked for making casteist remarks against Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) Vivek Bhagat, days after she accused the police officer of sexually harassing her while she was covering the ongoing Delhi protests.

A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi passed the order while hearing a batch of petitions concerning the protests.

The Court has ordered that no coercive action be taken against the journalist for now.

"That individual woman journalist about whom the allegations are there, and against whom the police official is stated to have gone to the High Court (for the registration of an SC/ST Act case) ...please see that there is no coercive action," said CJI Kant.

The Court proceeded to order,

"The journalist whose complaint with respect to the alleged molestation is pending consideration be protected from coercive action."

Representing the journalist, Senior Advocate Indira Jaising today argued that the caste-abuse case was filed vindictively because her client had accused the police officer of sexually harassing her.

She termed it an abuse of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (SC/ST Act).

"I am representing a woman who was very badly molested. The name of the police officer I will give to the Court. She went to the police station to lodge an FIR. No FIR was lodged. Now what does this man do? He has gone to the Delhi High Court and filed a petition under the Atrocities Act, saying that she used casteist remarks against him. That matter has been entertained. I am asking for an order that no coercive action be taken against any woman journalist who has made a complaint," Jaising said.

She went on to contend that journalists are entitled to certain protections while carrying out their professional duties, and should not be met with criminal prosecution in connection with their work

Representing the government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, however, pointed out that in the contemporary digital era, it has become difficult to distinguish between journalists and "reel-makers" who are simply concerned with posting content on social media.

"What is going on is reel-making, and that happens even at protest sites. So we do not know who is a reel-maker and who is an independent journalist. But nobody should be inappropriately dealt with. Including female police personnel, if you don't mind ... So far as (Jaising's argument that no FIR should be registered) against any woman journalist is concerned, that would be too wide a direction," he said.

Mehta also assured the Court that the allegations levelled by the journalist are also being treated seriously. He urged the Court not to pass any blanket order without first hearing the government's response in detail.

"The allegation is very serious. If it is answerable, we will answer. We must face whatever consequences follow. But please don't put the cart before the horse. Please hear us," Mehta submitted.

"The police are misusing the SC/ST Act. The police officer has gone to the High Court under the SC/ST Act, while my client's FIR has not been registered. Look at this," Jaising persisted, while urging for the grant of interim protection for the journalist.

The senior counsel went on to argue that a police investigation into the matter raises concerns about bias.

"I don't want an investigation by the police. They cannot investigate themselves. They cannot be judges in their own cause," she said.

She also suggested that an independent committee be set up look into any complaints of sexual harassment made by women journalists covering the protests.

The Court proceeded to grant interim protection to the independent journalist booked in the SC/ST Act case filed on ACP Bhagat's complaint.

Jaising urged the Court to also direct that no coercive action may be taken against any woman journalist covering the protests. She raised concerns that such reporters may face false cases for reporting any sexual harassment that they encounter during the protests.

"No coercive action against any woman journalist," urged Jaising.

The Bench, however, declined to pass such a wide order, stating that the protection can only be extended to specific cases brought to the Court's notice.

"It will be restricted to the specific instance you have given in the petition, and also the names of the persons you are giving in the enclosed material," said Justice Bagchi.

"Yes. We will give that," replied Jaising.

She also opposed SG Mehta's suggestion that the journalist must cooperate, in the meantime, with the police's probe.

"In the meanwhile, this particular woman journalist may cooperate. We will not arrest her," said SG Mehta.

"No! We will not cooperate with you. The police cannot investigate themselves. The Court has already said that," retorted Jaising.

"Whether they are accredited journalists, individual freelance journalists, influencers, etc., there will be layers of protection for media journalists. That is a larger question," the Bench went on to observe, before parting with the matter.

[Live Coverage]