SC directs for no coercive action against journalist booked in Uttar Pradesh

New Delhi:The Supreme Court on Thursday directed for no coercive steps against a journalist in connection with four FIRs registered against her in Uttar Pradesh.

A bench of Justices B R Gavai, P K Mishra and K V Viswanathan issued a notice to the Uttar Pradesh government seeking its response on a petition filed by journalist Mamta Tripathi, who sought the FIRs to be quashed.

Tripathi claimed the FIRs were politically motivated and frivolously filed with an attempt to stifle the freedom of press.

According to Tripathi, the FIRs were in relation to certain tweets posted by her.

While hearing her plea, the bench said, "It is directed that no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner (Tripathi) in connection with the subject articles." The case will be heard after four weeks.

Senior advocate Siddharth Dave, who appeared for Tripathi, argued that a journalist, namely, Abhishek Upadhyay had earlier approached the apex court seeking quashing of an FIR against him for a news report on the "caste dynamics of the general administration" in the state.

Dave, referring to the SC order on Upadhyay's plea, said he was a co-accused in one of these FIRs lodged against Tripathi and on his petition, the top court had earlier in October protected him from any coercive steps.

The top court in Upadhyay's case said only because writings of a journalist were perceived as a criticism of the government, criminal cases should not be slapped against the writer.

It is pure harassment, said Dave, adding the FIRs had been registered against journalists merely for their posts on X.

In her plea filed through advocate Amarjit Singh Bedi, Tripathi said the four FIRs were lodged at Ayodhya, Amethi, Barabanki and Lucknow, respectively.

"The FIRs are politically motivated and attempts are being made to scuttle the freedom of press by lodging frivolous FIRs against the petitioner," the plea stated.

It said the petitioner, through her stories, attempted to point out the facts and reported events that had transpired in the state of Uttar Pradesh.

"However, the same has not gone down well within the powerhouse of administration and frivolous FIRs have been filed against her," the plea said.

According to the petitioner, multiple FIRs had been lodged against to create a "chilling effect" and deter her from raising questions on the functioning of the incumbent government.

"It is submitted that a free press is the fourth pillar of democracy and cannot be prevented from publishing facts, opinion, and analysis howsoever unpalatable to the ruling establishment," the plea said.

Referring to Article 19(1)(a) (freedom of speech and expression), the petitioner said the protection available here to journalists reinforced that criticism of a government policy couldn't form the basis of FIRs.

The FIRs were stated be a clear attempt to misuse the law enforcement machinery of the state to silence the her voice.