Gandhinagar: 17, August By Mintu Jaiswal
Serious questions have been raised over the conduct of the Gandhinagar Police after journalists covering an Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) Mahila Morcha protest outside the Gujarat Chief Minister’s residence were allegedly manhandled, abused and taken to a police station for nearly an hour.
The protest was organised after AAP women leaders raised concerns over a series of alleged rape cases reported in Ahmedabad within a week. AAP women leader Payal Sakariya had earlier addressed a press conference at Gandhinagar Circuit House, following which around 100–150 women activists marched towards the Chief Minister’s residence and attempted to seek an appointment with Chief Minister Bhupendra Patel.
The protest reportedly took place around 500 metres from the CM’s residence. While the demonstration was underway, journalists from Navjivan News and Nirbhay News were present for coverage.
According to the journalists involved, Navjivan News reporter Faizan Rangrez approached Gandhinagar SP Ravi Teja Vasamsetty and asked questions regarding the situation. The journalists allege that the SP pushed Rangrez and used abusive language.
The allegations do not end there.
The Navjivan News cameraman, Shahadat, allegedly had his hand held by a police constable, following which videos recorded on his mobile phone were allegedly deleted. The journalists claim they were told that the matter was “sensitive” and therefore could not be covered.
The journalists further allege that an LCB PI identified as Wada also used abusive language and asked them to move away from the spot.
Why Were Journalists Taken to the Police Station?
The situation escalated further when journalists from Navjivan News and Nirbhay News, including reporter Ridhi and their respective cameramen, were allegedly taken in a police vehicle to a police station.
According to their account, they were questioned about why they had come to cover the protest when other journalists had allegedly not arrived, and why they were taking a “negative” position towards the SP.
The journalists say they were kept at the police station for approximately one hour before being allowed to leave.
Can Police Decide Where Journalists Can Report?
The incident raises a fundamental question: Can the police decide where a journalist may or may not perform legitimate news coverage?
Freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) is central to the functioning of a free press, although it remains subject to reasonable restrictions under the Constitution. The Supreme Court has also recognised the public interest involved in the media’s right to disseminate information and the public’s right to receive it. At the same time, the Court has emphasised that reporting must respect privacy, dignity and the fairness of criminal investigations, particularly in cases involving sexual offences.
It would therefore be inaccurate to claim that the Supreme Court has given journalists an unlimited right to record anywhere and under all circumstances. Police can impose lawful restrictions for security, public order, restricted areas or other legitimate reasons. But such restrictions should have a clear legal basis and should not become an excuse for intimidation, abuse or destruction of journalistic material.
A Bigger Question for the Gujarat Police
The most disturbing allegation is the alleged deletion of videos from a journalist’s mobile phone.
If a journalist’s footage was deleted by police personnel, the matter deserves an independent inquiry, including examination of the mobile device, CCTV footage from the location and statements of the journalists and police personnel involved.
The incident also raises another question: If the protest had already been continuing for around 20 minutes, why did the police intervention allegedly occur only later? Was there a prior security arrangement around the CM’s residence, and were journalists given any clear instructions regarding the permissible area for media coverage?
These questions require answers from the police administration.
Police officers have an important responsibility to maintain law and order, particularly near the residence of a Chief Minister. But journalists also have a legitimate role in documenting public demonstrations and questioning public officials.
The police do not issue a journalist’s professional licence. Journalistic accreditation and recognition are governed by the competent authorities and applicable rules. A disagreement with a journalist’s questions, reporting or editorial line cannot by itself justify physical intimidation, abusive language or interference with recorded material.
‘Fourth Pillar’ Must Be Treated With Respect
The episode has once again sparked concern over the working conditions and treatment of journalists in Gujarat.
A journalist asking uncomfortable questions is not necessarily an adversary of the police. Questioning those in authority is one of the fundamental functions of journalism.
If the allegations made by the journalists are found to be true, the conduct would represent a serious blow to the principle of press freedom and raise questions about police accountability.
The Gujarat government and senior police authorities should therefore consider ordering an impartial inquiry into the entire episode, including the alleged pushing and abuse of the reporter, alleged deletion of video footage, alleged detention of journalists and the conduct of the officers involved.
A democracy becomes stronger when journalists can ask questions without fear – and when the police can enforce the law without crossing the line of intimidation.
