Abhishek Upadhyaya Moves Supreme Court Against Ghaziabad Police Seeking Digital Information Of X Account

Abhishek Upadhyay has moved Supreme Court of India to restrain the Ghaziabad Police from seeking, obtaining, accessing, processing or disclosing any information, including the digital/account information of his X account @upadhyayabhii.

Upadhyay has been accused in a road rage case which he alleged to be a fabricated one in retaliation for his investigative reporting on alleged irregularities concerning the Ram Mandir.

A mentioning was made today before a CJI Surya Kant led bench wherein Advocate Anoop Prakash Awasthi stated, "The Ghaziabad Police has sought my digital footprint from June 1, 2026 in connection to the road rage case..that is when I broke the Ram Mandir donations theft story..all of the sources would be revealed and they would be harassed by the police..I have received information from the Meta office from California that they have sought my digital footprint..I have filed an application..".

The CJI in response said, "We will see".

Upadhyay's application seeks ad-interim stay and quashing of a notice u/s 94 of BNSS dated 22 August, 2026 issued by crime branch unit, Police Commissionerate, Ghaziabad, UP. Upadhyay received an email from X from its legal department at San Francisco, California, informing him that X had received a request from the Crime Branch Investigation Unit, Ghaziabad, seeking production of information relating to the Petitioner’s X account @upadhyayabhii.

"The FIR concerns an alleged incident dated 18.08.2026, whereas the Investigating Agency seeks the Petitioner’s IP and account-related information commencing from 01.06.2026, i.e. for a period substantially preceding the alleged occurrence. No nexus between such sweeping historical digital information and the investigation of the alleged incident has been disclosed in the impugned notice....the timing of the impugned demand assumes particular significance. On 07.06.2026, the Petitioner, in the course of his investigative journalism, had reported material concerning irregularities and theft relating to donations associated with the Ram Temple. The period for which the Respondents now seek the Petitioner’s digital footprint substantially overlaps with the period during which the Petitioner was researching, investigating, communicating with sources and collecting information and material concerning the said report and persons who gave that information to the Petitioner," the application states.

Court has further been told that the demand for location data, device/IMEI details, alternate email addresses, mobile numbers and IP access logs is particularly intrusive and, cumulatively, has the potential to reconstruct his digital associations, contacts and movements over a period of nearly three months preceding the alleged occurrence. Such a sweeping demand cannot, in the absence of a demonstrated and proximate nexus with the alleged offence, be permitted merely by invoking the pendency of an investigation, he argues.

On August 25, the Supreme Court stayed the arrest of Upadhyay who had approached Court under Article 32 seeking quashing of an FIR registered against him in Ghaziabad and protection from arrest, alleging that the case was fabricated in retaliation for his investigative reporting on alleged irregularities in Uttar Pradesh. Court further directed the police to supply the copy of the registered FIR to Upadhyay adding that he can then approach the Allahabad High Court for seeking suitable reliefs. The Ghaziabad Police Commissioner has been asked to file a compliance report regarding the supply of the FIR by the next date of hearing.

A bench of CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana had earlier agreed to hear a writ petition filed by Upadhyay challenging the FIR. The petition challenges FIR No. 678/2026, registered at Indirapuram Police Station, Ghaziabad, on August 18 in connection with an alleged road-rage incident near Shipra Mall. The FIR invokes provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and the Information Technology Act. The petition itself notes discrepancies between the sections reflected in different portions of the FIR record.

Upadhyay, who runs the independent news portal “Top Secret”, has alleged that the FIR was lodged after he published investigative reports concerning alleged corruption and irregularities in Uttar Pradesh, including matters relating to the Ram Janmabhoomi premises and senior government officials.

Journalist denies road-rage allegations

According to the complaint forming the basis of the FIR, complainant Nikki Gautam alleged that his motorcycle was hit from behind by a Baleno near Shipra Mall on August 18. He further alleged that the driver abused and threatened him after the incident and identified the vehicle's owner as Abhishek Upadhyay.

Upadhyay has categorically denied the allegations and claimed that the incident was staged to target him because of his reporting. He has further alleged that the motorcycle registration number mentioned in the complaint does not correspond with the vehicle described by the complainant and does not belong to Gautam.

The petition also alleges that police personnel approached establishments near the alleged place of occurrence and pressured them to delete or not provide CCTV footage. These allegations are part of the petitioner's case and have not been independently established.

Seeks independent investigation

The journalist has expressed apprehension of arrest and alleged that he may face physical harm if he approaches the Allahabad High Court. He has therefore directly approached the Supreme Court seeking quashing of the FIR.

In the alternative, Upadhyay has stated that he is willing to join and cooperate with the investigation, but has sought a direction that the FIR, as well as any other FIRs allegedly arising from his reporting on the Ram Janmabhoomi donation issue, be investigated by the Delhi Police, CBI or another agency other than the Uttar Pradesh Police.

Petition links FIR to investigate reports

The petition traces the alleged sequence of events to a series of reports published by Upadhyay through “Top Secret” concerning alleged irregularities in the handling of donations and offerings at the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Temple in Ayodhya. It states that the first reports were published in June 2026 and that the Uttar Pradesh government's SIT subsequently commenced an investigation.

The petition records that an FIR was registered in Ayodhya on June 25 following the SIT's findings. The petition further states that on August 19, Upadhyay published an investigative report concerning an alleged purchase of agricultural land in Bhadohi by an IAS officer and that the report was widely circulated. It alleges that the accompanying video was temporarily removed from YouTube following alleged pressure and was later restored after a legal notice.

The petition claims that the FIR and subsequent police action came amid this sequence of investigative reports. It alleges that the proceedings were intended to intimidate him, while seeking judicial protection of his life and personal liberty. The allegations made by Upadhyay in the petition are yet to be adjudicated.

Case Title: Abhishek Upadhyaya v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors.

Bench: CJI Kant, Justice Bagchi and Justice Mohana

Mentioning Date: September 1, 2026