News Diggy

A WOMAN JOURNALIST ALLEGES MOLESTATION. INSTEAD OF AN FIR AGAINST THE ACCUSED COP, SHE FINDS HERSELF FACING ONE UNDER THE SC/ST ACT. THIS IS THE REAL STATE OF JUSTICE IN INDIA. On October 3, independent journalist Rosy was covering the detention of AISA president Neha Bora during a protest in Delhi demanding the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. She alleged that ACP Vivek Bhagat sexually harassed and manhandled her while she was recording the police action. Rosy approached the police seeking action against the officer. Yet, while her sexual harassment complaint remained under inquiry, an FIR was registered against her and others on the ACP’s counter-complaint, alleging casteist remarks, obstruction of official duty and defamation. The case invokes provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Let that sink in. A woman journalist alleges sexual misconduct by a serving police officer. Her complaint does not result in an FIR against him, but a counter-complaint against her results in an FIR against her. The officer denies the allegations and has made allegations of his own. Those allegations, too, must be investigated fairly. But why should the complainant’s pursuit of justice become a reason to leave her facing criminal proceedings while her own complaint remains unresolved? Enter Senior Advocate Indira Jaising. Jaising took the fight to the Supreme Court, seeking an independent, gender-sensitive investigation into allegations of sexual harassment and violence against women journalists covering protests. The Court has now directed that no coercive action be taken against Rosy in the case against her, while considering a broader mechanism to examine complaints by women journalists. That intervention matters. It gives Rosy breathing space and brings a deeply troubling question before the country’s highest court: who investigates allegations against the police when the complainant herself becomes a target of police action? A uniform does not confer immunity. A journalist’s right to report from a protest site does not disappear because the authorities find her inconvenient. And invoking the protection of the SC/ST Act must never become a substitute for an impartial investigation of competing allegations. The SC/ST Act exists to protect people against caste-based atrocities. Its seriousness must be respected—not diminished through political or institutional gamesmanship. Equally, allegations of sexual harassment must be investigated on their merits, without intimidation or retaliation. Justice cannot mean that the powerful get the first FIR while the vulnerable are left fighting for theirs. Rosy deserves a fair investigation. ACP Vivek Bhagat’s counter-allegations deserve a fair investigation. The evidence must decide both cases—not rank, uniform, influence or the convenience of the institution. Credit where it is due: Indira Jaising stepped in when legal intervention became essential. The Supreme Court’s protection is an important development, but it is not the final verdict on the allegations. The larger question remains: Will India protect women journalists who document the exercise of state power—or teach them that speaking up can put them in the dock? #SCSTएक्ट #JusticeForRosy #WomenJournalists #FreedomOfPress #RuleOfLaw #DelhiـPolice