Anyone With Mobile Phone Claims To Be Reporter: Delhi High Court Seeks Media Regulatory Framework Ensuring Professional Accountability

The accused applicants approached the High Court seeking regular bail in a case registered under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 304(2), 317(2), 109,74,191(1),191(2),190 of the BNS.

The Single Bench of Justice Girish Kathpalia held, “Freedom of press is an indispensable pillar of every democratic society. However, in recent years, with rapid proliferation of social media and digital platforms, a significant section of the media has become largely unregulated and unorganized. Today, virtually anyone armed with a mobile phone and a microphone can proclaim themselves to be a “reporter”, often without any journalistic training, ethical grounding, or accountability.”

“Of course, the freedom of press must remain zealously protected. But, it cannot become a shield for irresponsible journalism, intimidation or the dissemination of content that jeopardizes public order. The time has come for the legislature to consider an appropriate regulatory framework that preserves freedom of press, while ensuring professional accountability, ethical standards, and respect for the rule of law, the rights of citizens and the larger public interest”, it added.

Advocate Ankit Tandan represented the Petitioner while Additional Public Prosecutor Sanjeev Sabharwal represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The de facto complainant and his colleague, claiming in the FIR to be “from the media” were engaged in recording at an unauthorised colony in Seemapuri. At that time, they were assaulted by a few residents of the area. Thereafter, some ladies and teenagers allegedly beat them up. One of the people from the crowd snatched their camera battery, mobile phone and also allegedly damaged their motorcycles. On the basis of these allegations, the local police registered an FIR.

Reasoning

Referring to video footage brought to the Court’s attention, the Bench noted that the accused/applicant Abid Ali claimed that he was wearing a black T-shirt and was being pulled away from the crowd by his mother wearing a yellow suit. The Bench noted that the four co-accused persons out of the mob had already been released on bail.

On a perusal of the facts of the case, the Bench noted that the prosecution was not certain about the identity of the accused/applicants as in the status report filed before the Court of Sessions, the Investigating Officer took a stand that the accused/applicant Furkan was the person wearing a white shirt as depicted in the video footage, whereas in the chargesheet, the Investigating Officer took a stand that Furkan was the person wearing a brown t-shirt.

“It is on such material that the accused/applicants are languishing in jail for past almost one year and trial is yet to commence. And to add to it is the abovementioned lackadaisical approach of police in contesting these bail applications. The accused/applicants cannot be kept in jail endlessly”, it added.

The Bench held, “Analyzed against the above backdrop, what appears in the present case is that the complainant and his colleague were recording some video as regards a place of worship in the area, allegedly constructed unauthorizedly. That apparently agitated the local residents and they attacked the complainant and his colleague.

Holding that the involvement of the accused/applicants in the alleged assault remained a grey area, the Bench allowed both the bail applications and directed them to be released on bail, subject to each of them furnishing a personal bond.

Cause Title: Abid Ali @ Aabi v. The State (Govt. NCT Of Delhi) (Neutral Citation: 2026:DHC:5665)

Click here to read/download Order