Supreme Court Grants Interim Protection To Woman Journalist In SC/ST Case, Declines Blanket Relief For Women Journalists Covering Delhi Protests
SG Tushar Mehta says it is difficult to tell independent journalists from reel-makers at protest sites; Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia flags alleged assault on a pregnant reporter during October 12 march.
Supreme Court grants interim protection to woman journalist, refuses blanket relief for all women reporters covering Delhi protests
The Supreme Court on Thursday granted interim protection from coercive action to a woman journalist accused of making casteist remarks against a police officer whom she had accused of sexual harassment. It declined to extend the protection to all women journalists covering the Delhi protests.
A Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi passed the order after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta opposed blanket protection, submitting that it had become difficult to distinguish independent journalists from people making social media reels.
Mehta said the journalist's allegations were serious and would be answered, but urged the Court to hear the government before issuing broader directions.
"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," he submitted.
Jaising questioned whether the police could impartially investigate allegations against their own personnel and proposed an independent committee to examine sexual harassment complaints made by women journalists covering the protests.
"I don't want an investigation by the police. They cannot investigate themselves. They cannot be judges in their own cause," she argued.
When Jaising pressed for protection for every woman journalist covering the protests, Justice Bagchi confined the relief to the cases before the Court.
"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," Justice Bagchi said.
Jaising agreed to furnish the particulars.
Mehta then suggested that the journalist cooperate with the investigation while being protected from arrest.
"In the meanwhile, this particular woman journalist may cooperate. We will not arrest her," he submitted.
Jaising rejected the suggestion. "No! We will not cooperate with you. The police cannot investigate themselves. The Court has already said that," she responded.
Separately, in proceedings concerning the October 12 march towards the Supreme Court, Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia drew the Court's attention to the alleged pushing of a pregnant woman journalist and sought preservation of CCTV footage. The Court directed law enforcement agencies to preserve CCTV and other digital material, while also issuing notice in the petition.
Jaising pointed out that politics was being brought inside the courtrooms at this juncture. At that point, Bhatia said, “It is suprising that she is now not wanting to take up her own cause. The pregnant lady is in hospital! ANI says it”.
SG Mehta noted that the woman journalist was indeed pushed.
Before parting with the matter, the Bench observed that the protection available to accredited journalists, independent freelancers and influencers raised a larger question.