SC Bars Coercive Action Against Journalist Accused of Casteist Slurs by Delhi Cop
The Supreme Court bars coercive action against a journalist accused of casteist remarks after she alleged sexual harassment by a Delhi Police ACP.
The Supreme Court has stepped in to prevent coercive action against a woman journalist who was booked under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act following a volatile clash with a senior Delhi Police officer. The legal battle stems from a series of conflicting allegations involving sexual harassment and caste-based discrimination during the coverage of a protest in the national capital.
The Spark: Allegations of Sexual Assault
The incident dates back to October 3, when the journalist was reporting on a protest organized by the All India Students’ Association (AISA). The protesters were demanding the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. According to the journalist's complaint, the situation turned violent when she attempted to record a police officer detaining a woman activist.
She alleged that ACP Vivek Bhagat caught hold of her breast, pressed it, and pushed her. When she confronted the officer about his behavior, she claimed he ordered her to leave and summoned female police personnel to surround her. Following the encounter, she filed a formal complaint at the Parliament Street police station on the same day.
The Counter-Strike: Casteist Remark Allegations
While the journalist's complaint—along with those of two other journalists who also accused Bhagat of sexual harassment—was transferred to the Crime Branch for an impartial inquiry, no FIR was registered against the officer. Instead, ACP Vivek Bhagat launched a counter-offensive.
Bhagat filed a complaint alleging that the journalist and her colleagues had publicly humiliated him and obstructed him from performing his official duties. He specifically claimed that the journalist pointed at his nameplate and made derogatory, casteist remarks regarding his appointment as an ACP.
Following this complaint, an FIR was registered against three journalists under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, citing criminal defamation and obstruction of a public servant.
Supreme Court Intervention
After the Delhi High Court declined to grant an urgent hearing on her plea for protection from arrest, the journalist moved the Supreme Court. Senior Advocate Indira Jaising, representing the journalist, argued that the proceedings under the Atrocities Act were a retaliatory measure initiated only after the journalist had reported the sexual harassment.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi took a serious view of the matter. Addressing Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who represented the Delhi Police, the Court explicitly directed: “Don’t take coercive action against any woman journalist.”
Key Points of the Court's Consideration:
- Serious Allegations: The Chief Justice noted that the allegations of harassment against women journalists are "very serious."
- Independent Probe: The Court is currently examining whether an independent agency should be tasked with investigating the allegations against the police officials.
- Proposed Oversight Committee: Indira Jaising requested the formation of a committee to examine complaints of sexual harassment and assault against women journalists. She offered to provide a list of victims in a sealed cover and suggest candidates to lead the panel.
- Panel Composition: The Court suggested that such a committee should predominantly consist of former women judges and former IPS officers.
Police Response and Challenges
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta maintained that while no woman should face harassment, the police need time to file their report before blanket directions are issued. He also raised a practical concern regarding the identification of journalists, noting the difficulty in distinguishing between accredited journalists and freelancers or social media influencers during chaotic protest scenes.