Delhi HC Issues Notice to Police in Journalist's Plea; Refuses Stay on ACP Vivek Bhagat Case
Delhi High Court issues notice over FIR against journalist in ACP Vivek Bhagat's SC/ST act case but refuses to stay the investigation.
The Delhi High Court has issued a formal notice regarding petitions filed by journalists challenging an FIR registered under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The case stems from a complaint filed by ACP Vivek Bhagat, who alleged that caste-related remarks were made during a protest. While the court has agreed to hear the pleas, it has explicitly refused to stay the ongoing investigation.
Court's Stance on the Investigation
Presiding over the matter, Justice Mini Pushkarna stated that the court would evaluate the merits of the petitions only after receiving a response from the Delhi Police. During the proceedings, the judge observed, "I will simply issue notice. I will hear it on merits once [police] reply is there. Investigation will continue."
Senior Advocate Tanveer Ahmed Mir, representing the journalist, had pressed the court for a strong interim order to halt the investigation. However, the court declined to provide this relief at the current stage and has scheduled the final hearing for November 17.
The Conflict: Casteist Remarks vs. Sexual Assault Allegations
The legal battle traces back to an incident on October 3 during a protest at Buta Singh Chowk. An FIR was registered at the Parliament Street police station based on a complaint by ACP Vivek Bhagat, who claimed he was targeted with caste-based slurs.
However, the narrative takes a sharp turn with the counter-allegations made by Rosy, an independent journalist. She has approached the High Court seeking the quashing of the FIR and protection from arrest, claiming that the charges against her are a retaliatory measure.
The Journalist's Counter-Claims
- Sexual Assault Allegation: Rosy has accused ACP Vivek Bhagat of sexual assault during the October 3 protest.
- Retaliation Claim: She contends that the FIR alleging casteist remarks was filed only to intimidate her and discourage her from pursuing her own complaint against the ACP.
- Lack of Action: The journalist stated that although she filed a complaint on October 3—which was transferred to the Crime Branch—no FIR was registered based on her allegations, even while she cooperated with the inquiry and requested the preservation of CCTV and body-camera footage.
Legal Provisions and Next Steps
The FIR filed by ACP Vivek Bhagat is comprehensive, invoking several sections of the new legal framework and special acts. It includes Sections 221, 356(2), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, alongside Sections 3(1)(p), 3(1)(q), 3(1)(r), and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Rosy has challenged the applicability of these specific provisions, arguing that the proceedings are a tool for harassment. A male journalist who accompanied her during the protest has also moved the High Court in a similar plea.
As the Delhi Police prepares its response, the High Court will determine whether the FIR against the journalists stands or if the allegations of retaliation carry weight. The matter remains contested as the court awaits the next hearing.