Read Time: 05 minutes

The Supreme Court has granted two months protection to the a news Portal called The Wire and to three of its reporters from three FIRs registered against them by Uttar Pradesh Police.

Court also said also asked the petitioners to approach the concerned HC instead, adding that though it was aware of the issues surrounding fundamental rights in the present case, allowing the plea would open a Pandora's box and the petitioner's should have approached the HC first.

A bench comprising Justices L Nageswara Rao, BR Gavai and BV Nagarathna was hearing a writ petition filed by Foundation for Independent Journalism (the company which owns "The Wire") and Seraj Ali, Mukul Singh Chauhan and Ismat Ara, employees of the Wire.

The plea sought quashing 3 FIRs registered against them by the UP Police over some reports published by "The Wire".

The FIRs were filed with respect to the following reports of 'The Wire':

Report about the death of a farmer-protester during the Republic Day march and the allegations of his family members that he was killed in a police gun fire, Report about the attack on an old Muslim man at Ghaziabad, Report about the demolition of a mosque at Barabanki.

FIRs were lodged at the police stations of Rampur, Ghaziabad and Barabanki respectively, alleging that false and alarming news reports were published to cause communal disharmony. Offences under Sections 153, 153-A,153-B, 505 of the IPC were invoked in the FIR.

"No part of the matter published is even remotely an offence, although it may be unpalatable to the government or some people. No unrest ever resulted or was likely to result on account of the concerned news reports," the plea filed through Advocate Shadaan Farasat states.

It was contended that "the fundamental assumption in these FIRs is that The Wire and its journalists have reported what they have with the intent to foment communal disharmony. To posit reporting – especially the verbatim claims of citizens who are or say they are victims of crime – as tending to create disharmony or as an inherently criminal act is most pernicious, and this mode of criminalising expression deserves relief and remedial measures from this Hon'ble Court, else no journalist will be able to report fearlessly and the media will become caught in the criminal process for simply doing its job."

The petitioners argued that the the criminal proceedings initiated against them amount to an abuse of the due process of law, and they also severely curtail the their right to free speech and expression, as well as that of carrying on their profession of journalism. 

Case Title: Foundation for independent journalism Vs. UOI