Delhi HC Refuses to Halt SC/ST Act Probe Against Journalists
Delhi High Court declines to halt investigation into an FIR filed by an ACP against two journalists under the SC/ST Act.
The Delhi High Court has declined to grant a stay on the investigation into an FIR registered under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against two journalists. The case stems from a complaint lodged by Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) Vivek Bhagat, alleging the use of caste-related remarks.
Court Defers Decision Until After Dussehra
Presiding over the matter, Justice Mini Pushkarna stated that the court could not pass an order restraining the police from proceeding with the probe at this stage. The judge noted that the case would be heard immediately following the Dussehra break.
Senior Advocate Tanveer Ahmed Mir, representing journalists Rosy and Gajendra Singh, had urged the court to intervene and direct the Delhi Police to cease further steps in the investigation. Mir argued for interim protection, emphasizing the specific sequence of events that led to the legal battle.
A Clash of Allegations
The legal dispute is complicated by cross-allegations between the parties involved. The FIR against the journalists was registered at the Parliament Street police station following the ACP's complaint regarding an incident at Buta Singh Chowk on October 3, where a protest was taking place.
However, Rosy, an independent journalist, has presented a starkly different account. She has accused ACP Vivek Bhagat of sexual assault during the same incident. According to her petition, she had filed a complaint against the officer on October 3, which was subsequently transferred to the Crime Branch for an inquiry.
Claims of Retaliation
In her plea to the High Court, Rosy has sought the quashing of the FIR and the resulting proceedings, while also requesting protection against arrest or other coercive actions. She has denied making any casteist remarks and contends that the FIR against her is a retaliatory move intended to intimidate her.
The petition further highlights that despite her cooperation with the Crime Branch and her requests to preserve CCTV footage and police body-camera recordings, no FIR had been registered based on her sexual assault complaint at the time the case against her was initiated.
Legal Provisions Invoked
The FIR registered against Rosy invokes several serious provisions, including:
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita: Sections 221, 356(2), and 3(5).
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act: Sections 3(1)(p), 3(1)(q), 3(1)(r), and 3(1)(s).
The journalist has questioned the applicability of these specific sections, alleging that the legal machinery is being used to discourage her from pursuing her own complaint against the high-ranking police officer.