The Free Speech Collective has filed a contempt petition alleging that Delhi Police violated the Supreme Court’s October 11 order protecting journalists covering protests.
The petition seeks the preservation of evidence, disclosure of details of detained journalists and an independent, time-bound inquiry into alleged police misconduct.
It also urges the Supreme Court to frame binding guidelines to protect journalists from assault, detention and obstruction during protests and crowd-control operations.
Two days after the Supreme Court directed Delhi Police not to obstruct reporters covering the Jantar Mantar protests, journalists have approached the top court alleging that many media persons were illegally detained and several had their equipment damaged by the police.
Saying that “Such conduct strikes at the constitutional function of the press as a public watchdog, inhibits the contemporaneous documentation and dissemination of information concerning the exercise of State power, and creates a chilling effect on independent reporting”, the Free Speech Collective, an association working to protect press freedom and freedom of expression, has filed a contempt petition before the Chief Justice’s Court through Aarthi Rajan.
The petition alleges wilful disobedience of the Supreme Court’s October 11 order in Shailendra Mani Tripathi v. Govind Mohan & Ors. (Contempt Petition (C) Diary No. 63801/2026 in W.P. (C) Diary No. 63560/2026).
In its order, a Bench comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana recorded the Solicitor General’s assurance that lawyers, journalists and other professionals would not be obstructed in the course of their work. Paragraph 16(f) explicitly directed that they “shall not be hindered in discharge of their professional duties in any manner whatsoever”.
The plea seeks contempt proceedings over the alleged violation of the Court’s order, identification of the police officers and supervisory officials responsible, and disclosure of how the Court’s directions were conveyed to personnel deployed on the ground.
The petition argues that the detention, removal, obstruction and use of force against journalists reporting on the events not only prevented them from performing their professional duties but also infringed the public’s right to information and the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
It contends that these actions violated both the constitutional protection of press freedom and the Supreme Court’s express direction that journalists must not be hindered “in any manner whatsoever”.
Despite the order, journalists faced obstructions while reporting from various locations in Delhi on October 11, 2026. At R.K. Ashram Marg, journalists questioning the Delhi Police about the detention of another journalist were themselves stopped.
The petitions mention journalists associated with India Today, Scroll, The Indian Express, PTI, The Quint, The Hindu, Newslaundry, Reuters, Business Standard, BOOMLive, The News Minute, Maktoob Media, Peek TV, Reporter TV, The Caravan, 24 News and Asianet News.
In a separate writ petition, the Free Speech Collective has asked the Supreme Court to protect journalists and media workers engaged in bona fide newsgathering from assault, threats, detention, forced removal or obstruction, except where such action is legally authorised, justified and proportionate.
Petition Seeks Probe, Evidence Preservation
The petition seeks enforcement of the Court’s order and the immediate preservation and production of all relevant evidence from October 10 onwards, including CCTV footage, body-worn camera recordings, police videography, wireless communications, PCR call logs, duty rosters, deployment records, vehicle logs, detention registers, arrest memos, medical records and complaints.
It also asks the Delhi Police to disclose details of journalists and media workers detained, removed, transported, injured or prevented from reporting, specifying the location, legal grounds, officers responsible, duration of custody and whether medical assistance was provided.
The petition further seeks an independent, time-bound inquiry into allegations of detention, violence, injury and obstruction, with responsibility fixed at both individual and command levels. It calls for appropriate disciplinary action, compensation and other remedial measures.
The petition states that the Delhi Police reportedly justified some detentions on the grounds that journalists were working “too close” to protesters or that there was “confusion” over their professional identity. However, these explanations did not dispute that those detained were journalists engaged in reporting.
Finally, it urges the Court to frame binding guidelines for police interactions with journalists during protests, public gatherings and crowd-control operations. These would cover visible officer identification, recognition of press credentials without treating accreditation as the sole proof of journalistic status, limits on the use of force, recording of reasons for action, access to lawyers and editorial organisations, medical assistance, protection of equipment and data, and preservation of evidence.
The matter is likely to come up for hearing on Tuesday, and the petitioners will be represented by senior advocates Gopal Sankaranarayanan and Chander Uday Singh.
