Supreme Court Shields Journalist Abhisar Sharma from Arrest
SC grants four-week protection in Assam FIR case.
The Supreme Court on Thursday granted journalist Abhisar Sharma interim protection from arrest for four weeks in connection with a First Information Report (FIR) filed against him in Assam. The FIR stems from a controversial video posted on Sharma’s YouTube channel, where he allegedly criticized the Assam government’s decision to allocate 3,000 bighas of tribal land to a private entity. The bench, comprising Justices M M Sundresh and N Kotiswar Singh, directed Sharma to approach the Gauhati High Court to seek quashing of the FIR while providing him temporary relief.
The apex court also issued a notice to the Central government, seeking its response to Sharma’s plea challenging the constitutional validity of Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). This section addresses acts deemed to endanger India’s sovereignty, unity, and integrity, raising questions about freedom of expression in journalism. Sharma’s legal team, led by advocate Sumeer Sodhi, argued that the FIR, initiated by a private individual’s complaint, was an attempt to stifle critical reporting.
The case has sparked widespread debate about press freedom, particularly in the context of state policies affecting marginalized communities. Sharma’s video reportedly questioned the rationale behind transferring tribal land, highlighting potential socio-economic impacts on indigenous groups. Supporters of the journalist claim the FIR is a retaliatory move to silence dissent, while critics argue that his content may have overstepped legal boundaries.
Also Read: Supreme Court Collegium Split Fuels Transparency Debate
This interim protection offers Sharma a brief respite as he prepares to challenge the FIR in the Gauhati High Court. The Supreme Court’s notice to the Centre on the BNS provision signals a broader examination of laws governing free speech and their application to journalists. As the case unfolds, it is likely to intensify discussions on the balance between state authority and the media’s role in holding power to account. Legal experts and civil rights advocates are closely watching the proceedings, anticipating potential implications for future cases involving press freedom.
Also Read: Supreme Court Orders Probe into NCLAT Bribery Claim
