Delhi Protest Hearing: Supreme Court Blocks Coercive Action Against Woman Journalist Who Alleged Sexual Assault by ACP Dispute

The Supreme Court on Thursday directed Delhi Police not to take any coercive action or arrest an independent female journalist accused of uttering casteist slurs against a senior police officer. A bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued the order after Senior Advocate Indira Jaising stated that criminal charges were being used as a retaliatory weapon against a reporter who had first reported being sexually harassed during protest coverage.

The intervention came amid hearings on mass detentions and police measures taken during demonstrations near Jantar Mantar. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the authorities, assured the bench that law enforcement agencies would not arrest the journalist provided she cooperates with the ongoing inquiry.

Retaliatory FIRs and Sexual Harassment Claims

The legal dispute traces back to October 3, 2026, when an independent reporter, identified as Rosy, was filming police detaining activists near the Buta Singh Roundabout during protests against the Election Commission. She alleged that Connaught Place Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) Vivek Bhagat physically struck her on the chest, manhandled her, and groped her while she carried out her editorial duties.

She submitted a formal sexual harassment complaint at the Parliament Street police station the same afternoon. However, Delhi Police deferred registering a direct First Information Report (FIR) against the officer, choosing instead to transfer her grievance to the Crime Branch for a preliminary inquiry.

Ten days later, on October 13, ACP Bhagat submitted a formal counter-complaint at the Parliament Street station, alleging that the reporter and two media colleagues hurled public casteist slurs at him, questioned his professional qualifications, and ran a campaign calling him a predator.

Police registered an FIR against the journalist under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act alongside Sections 221 (obstructing a public servant) and 356(2) (defamation) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

Supreme Court Orders Independent Judicial Review

Arguing before the top court, Jaising stated that the police response was designed to intimidate a complainant. She urged the bench to ensure no woman journalist who files a molestation complaint is subjected to coercive state action.

Taking stock of the submissions, Chief Justice Kant directed Delhi Police to refrain from taking coercive steps against the reporter while her original molestation complaint remains under formal consideration. To evaluate the conflicting accounts, the Supreme Court instructed Jaising to submit relevant documentary evidence and compiled materials in a sealed envelope.

The court indicated it will review the contents of the sealed envelope to consider naming an independent panel—comprising former judges and senior police officers untouched by the ongoing protest activities—to conduct an impartial probe into both sets of allegations. Additionally, all law enforcement agencies and private parties were ordered to preserve all digital, social media, and CCTV footage recorded during the October 3 events at Jantar Mantar.