New Delhi, Aug 25 (IANS) The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted interim protection from coercive action to journalist Abhishek Upadhyay in connection with an FIR registered by the Uttar Pradesh Police against him over an alleged road-rage incident in Ghaziabad.
A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana issued notice to the Uttar Pradesh government and directed that no coercive action be taken against Upadhyay in the FIR already registered against him or in any such FIR that may be registered against him.
“Meanwhile, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner in the FIR already registered or in such FIR that may be registered against him,” the CJI Kant-led Bench ordered.
The apex court also directed the Uttar Pradesh Police to supply a copy of the FIR registered at Indirapuram in Ghaziabad to Upadhyay, enabling him to avail appropriate legal remedies. “Similarly, let a copy of the FIR registered at Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, be supplied to the petitioner to enable him to avail every remedy against such FIR in accordance with law,” the CJI Kant-led Bench directed. It further directed the Commissioner of Police, Ghaziabad, to file a compliance report and posted the matter for further hearing on September 7.
The Supreme Court indicated that after receiving a copy of the FIR, Upadhyay could approach the Allahabad High Court for appropriate relief. “You approach the High Court, and if you can make out a case for quashing, fine. Meanwhile we can give you interim protection,” the top court said during the hearing.
Senior advocate Pradeep Rai, appearing for Upadhyay, submitted that the case was a “counter blast” to the journalist’s investigative reporting, particularly his reports concerning alleged irregularities in the Ram Mandir Trust and alleged corruption in the Uttar Pradesh administration.
Rai submitted that the “unpardonable sin” committed by Upadhyay was that he had exposed the alleged Ayodhya donation scam and claimed that the allegations made in the FIR were baseless. He further submitted that CCTV footage from the place of the alleged incident would establish the petitioner’s innocence and sought directions for preservation of the footage.
According to Upadhyay’s plea, he was returning home after picking up his minor daughter from school when a motorcyclist came alongside his car and allegedly tried to stop him, creating a commotion. The journalist claimed that, as he was accompanied by his minor daughter, he did not engage in any confrontation, verbal or otherwise, and instead chose to de-escalate the situation.
Upadhyay alleged that the incident was staged and that the complainant was planted by the State machinery in retaliation for his reporting. He further claimed that after learning about the allegations, he asked fellow journalists to approach shops and other establishments near the alleged place of occurrence to ascertain the availability of CCTV footage.
The plea alleged that police personnel had already approached some establishments and compelled them to delete or not provide CCTV footage relating to the relevant period. The plea also pointed out that the owner of the two-wheeler involved in the alleged incident was not the complainant, but another person.
Upadhyay has approached the Supreme Court through a criminal writ petition challenging the alleged coercive action and seeking appropriate relief in connection with the case.
–IANS
pds/uk
