The Supreme Court on October 15, 2026, considered forming a predominantly or exclusively women-led committee to investigate allegations of physical assault and sexual harassment of women journalists by Delhi Police personnel during protests against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi heard petitions seeking safeguards for journalists covering demonstrations. Senior advocate Indira Jaising sought an independent investigation, while Solicitor General Tushar Mehta raised concerns about distinguishing professional journalists from social media content creators. The court directed that no coercive action be taken against a woman journalist facing a police complaint and sought responses from the authorities on demands for stronger safeguards.
SC Considers Independent Investigation
During the hearing, the court indicated that it was open to considering a committee to examine complaints of alleged violence and sexual harassment against women journalists covering protests in Delhi. The proposed panel could include a retired woman judge, a former woman Indian Police Service (IPS) officer and a social worker or activist with a recognised record of work.
The petition was brought by the Network of Women in Media, India (NWMI), with Indira Jaising representing the demand for protection and accountability. Jaising argued that journalists had been pushed, assaulted and subjected to inappropriate treatment while carrying out their professional duties. She urged the court to ensure that complaints were examined independently rather than leaving the police to investigate allegations against their own personnel.
The bench indicated that it was considering a women-led panel and asked Jaising to suggest suitable names. She also said she would submit details of complaints received from women journalists in a sealed cover. The court’s observations were preliminary, and no final committee had been constituted at the time of the hearing.
Questions Over Identifying Journalists
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, highlighted the difficulties authorities face in identifying journalists amid the growth of digital media and social media content creation. He told the court, “In this era of technology, anybody with a mobile can be a journalist,” and questioned how police personnel could distinguish independent journalists from people making short videos or reels during protests.
The exchange raised an important question about press freedom in the digital age: how can authorities verify a person’s professional role without preventing legitimate reporting? Jaising maintained that journalists must be allowed to perform their duties safely, regardless of whether they work for established media organisations or operate independently. The court indicated that it wanted to lay down guidelines governing police interactions with journalists during protests and crowd-control operations.
FIR Against Journalist Adds To Concerns
The case also involves a woman journalist who accused Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) Vivek Bhagat of sexual harassment during the protests. Bhagat subsequently filed a complaint accusing her of making casteist remarks and publicly humiliating him while he was on duty. The journalist alleged that the police case was a counterblast to her complaint.
On October 15, the Supreme Court directed that no coercive action be taken against the journalist in the case filed against her. Jaising told the bench that no first information report (FIR) had been registered on the journalist’s complaint alleging molestation and sought safeguards against further cases being filed against women journalists. The bench described the allegations as serious and asked the police to examine the complaint and complete the inquiry.
The proceedings follow complaints by women journalists who said they were mistreated while covering demonstrations against Gyanesh Kumar and the SIR electoral roll revision. The allegations remain subject to investigation and should not be treated as established findings of wrongdoing. The court’s intervention seeks to address both the allegations of misconduct and the need for journalists to report from protest sites without fear of violence or arbitrary detention.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
A free press is essential to a functioning democracy, and journalists must be able to report on public demonstrations without fear of assault, harassment or intimidation. At the same time, allegations against police personnel must be investigated fairly, independently and transparently, with due process and the presumption of innocence respected for everyone involved.
The Supreme Court’s consideration of an independent, women-led committee is a significant step towards addressing concerns about the safety of women journalists. Clear guidelines, accountability and gender-sensitive policing can help build trust between law enforcement agencies, the media and the public. Protecting journalists does not mean placing them above the law; it means ensuring that the law protects their rights while holding everyone accountable to the same standards of justice.
How can India strengthen the safety of journalists covering protests while ensuring accountability and fairness for all parties? Share your views in the comments.
Also Read: ECI Orders Special Summary Revision Of Voter Rolls In 17 States And UTs To Update Voter Lists
