NEW DELHI: Defending a journalist who’s dealing with a legal case for writing what was perceived to be in opposition to Uttar Pradesh govt, Supreme Court docket mentioned the basic proper to freedom of speech and expression ought to be revered in a democracy and criticising govt shouldn’t be grounds for initiating legal prosecution of writers and scribes.
A bench of justices Hrishikesh Roy and S V N Bhatti restrained the UP govt from any coercive motion in opposition to the journalist who had printed an article with casteist tilt on the officers deployed in accountable positions within the state after which an FIR was lodged in opposition to him.
“In democratic nations, freedom to specific one’s views are revered. The rights of journalists are protected beneath Article 19(1)(a) of the Structure. Merely as a result of writings of a journalist are perceived as criticism of govt, legal instances shouldn’t be slapped in opposition to the author,” the bench mentioned.
SC’s order is on the road of its quite a few verdicts recognising dissent as a “image of a vibrant democracy”. Emphasising that the journalists and media homes ought to be protected, the apex court docket in March had held that courts ought to chorus from passing an ex-parte restraint order in opposition to media homes with out inspecting prima facie deserves of the allegations.
On this case, journalist Abhishek Upadhyaya moved SC via his lawyer Anoop Prakash Awasthi alleging that the state police filed an FIR, threatening him for publishing a narrative with the caption ‘Yadav Raj versus Thakur Raj’. Apprehending arrest and different legal instances , he sought safety from SC.
“The petitioner by his story tried to level out risks of caste bias typically administration of UP in varied regimes and comparative discourses thereupon, nevertheless identical has not gone effectively throughout the powerhouse of administration and a frivolous FIR has been filed in opposition to the petitioner and prelude of which is quoted right here beneath which compares the present UP CM as incarnation of God and therefore immune from any essential evaluation ,” the petition mentioned.
Although the petitioner named Yogi Adityanath as a celebration however he informed the court docket that the CM’s identify be deleted which was allowed. “Within the meantime, coercive steps shouldn’t be taken in opposition to the petitioner in reference to the topic Article,” the bench mentioned in its order, defending the Upadhyaya.
