SC declines to quash FIR against journalist Abhisar Sharma
2 min read
Grants interim protection from arrest. The top court directed the journalist to approach the Gauhati High Court to quash an FIR lodged by the Assam Police under Section 152 of BNS, which penalises “acts endangering the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India”.
New Delhi (Team Newsbuddy): The Supreme Court of India on Thursday granted a four-week interim protection from arrest to journalist Abhisar Sharma and directed him to approach the Gauhati High Court to challenge an FIR lodged against him by the Assam Police over a video post allegedly criticising the State’s policies. The FIR had invoked Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which criminalises “acts endangering the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India.”
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the journalist, argued that Section 152 had become an “omnibus provision” that was being indiscriminately invoked to stifle dissent. However, a Bench of Justices M.M. Sundresh and N. Kotiswar Singh questioned why the petitioner had approached the apex court directly, “bypassing” the Gauhati High Court.
“We are not inclined to entertain the challenge to the FIR. We grant interim protection of four weeks to the petitioner to enable him to approach the High Court”, the Bench said.
Sibal pointed out that the court had earlier granted protection to senior journalists Siddharth Varadarajan, Karan Thapar, and members of the Foundation for Independent Journalism, which publishes The Wire, in connection with a sedition case registered by the Assam Police’s Crime Branch. “Some uniformity must be there. They will lodge another FIR, then what will I do?” he said.
The Bench noted that the present FIR pertained to a “separate” matter and directed Sharma to approach the High Court for appropriate relief. However, it sought the Union government’s response on Sharma’s plea challenging the constitutional validity of Section 152 of the BNS and agreed to tag it with other pending petitions assailing the vires of the provision.
The dangerous wiring together of a ‘conspiracy’
In his petition, Sharma contended that the BNS provision was, in essence, a replica of Section 124A (sedition) of the erstwhile Indian Penal Code. The operation of Section 124A has been kept in abeyance by the Supreme Court, which referred the provision to a Constitution Bench for judicial scrutiny and an authoritative pronouncement. In May 2022, a three-judge Bench led by then Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana had observed that the sedition law was not in tune with the current social milieu, and was intended for a time when the country was under the colonial regime.
