The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought the personal presence of a senior Delhi Police officer on Thursday to explain allegations that women journalists covering the recent protests in the capital were assaulted and detained, stepping up its scrutiny of the police crackdown on demonstrators and mediapersons.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant made the observation after senior advocate Indira Jaising mentioned a petition filed by the Network of Women in Media, India (NWMI), seeking safeguards for journalists covering protests, particularly women journalists. The bench agreed to list the petition on Thursday, along with the pending matters concerning alleged police excesses and restrictions imposed ahead of the protests.
“We would like some senior officer to remain present here and explain,” said CJI, making it clear that the police would have to respond to the allegations.
Jaising informed the court that the copy of the petition and an advance notice had been given to solicitor general Tushar Mehta.
The court’s decision to seek the presence of a senior officer comes amid allegations that journalists were assaulted, manhandled and forcibly removed while reporting on protests against chief election commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over alleged irregularities in the special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan also mentioned a contempt petition filed by Freedom Speech Collective, alleging that police personnel assaulted journalists in violation of the Supreme Court’s October 10 order that mediapersons covering the protests must not be harassed. Senior advocate Chander Uday Singh mentioned a similar petition.
The NWMI’s petition seeks directions to ensure the safety and dignity of journalists covering protests and other public events. It argues that the existing inquiry into alleged police excesses does not specifically address journalists’ access to protest sites, their detention or forcible removal, and the safeguards necessary for independent reporting and newsgathering.
The plea demands directives to the Union government to ensure that women journalists engaged in bona fide reporting are not subjected to physical handling, intimidation, arbitrary detention or forcible removal merely because they are present at or near a protest, public assembly or crowd-control operation.
The court’s intervention follows reports of journalists being detained during the protests over the weekend, despite identifying themselves as members of the press.
On Sunday, Delhi Police detained at least 12 journalists covering demonstrations against Kumar, including Hindustan reporter Ashish Singh, who alleged that he was pushed, injured and forced onto a bus despite wearing his press identity card.
Singh, 27, was covering a protest called by the All India Students Association (AISA) near RK Ashram Marg when police personnel allegedly pushed him and struck him with what he described as a pointed object. He said he repeatedly identified himself as a Hindustan reporter and showed his identity card, but was still taken onto a bus along with a photojournalist.
The two journalists remained on the bus for around 20 to 30 minutes before getting off near Mandir Marg. Singh said he feared that police personnel might seize their phones and delete their recordings.
Other journalists were also reportedly detained while documenting police action against protesters. The Indian Express identified three of its journalists who were detained in Connaught Place and taken to Chhatrasal Stadium, around 12 km away, before being released nearly 45 minutes later. A journalist from The Hindu was also briefly pushed onto a bus before being released after identifying herself as a reporter.
The allegations have added a new dimension to the proceedings before the Supreme Court, which has already been examining claims of mass detentions, restrictions on public movement and curbs on metro and railway services ahead of the protests.
On Sunday, a special bench of justices, Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, directed that peaceful, unarmed protesters could not be detained except in accordance with the procedure established by law. It also ordered that public transport operate normally, internet connectivity remain undisturbed and free movement be restored, subject to lawful restrictions.
The bench issued notices in contempt proceedings alleging that authorities had failed to comply with its earlier directions on regulating transport services and protecting the right to peaceful protest. It also sought explanations on the circumstances and manner of the alleged detentions and their legal justification.
On Monday, CJI Kant cautioned lawyers against allowing the Supreme Court to be drawn into the political contest surrounding the protests, while emphasising that democratic activities must not obstruct the functioning of the court or the movement of lawyers, court staff and litigants.