Supreme Court Questions Ghaziabad Police on Social Media Data in Journalist's Road-Rage Case

Supreme Court's Inquiry into Police Request

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has directed the Ghaziabad Police to clarify the specific information it seeks from the microblogging site X regarding a road-rage incident involving a journalist who raised concerns about alleged mismanagement of donations at the Ram temple in Ayodhya.

A three-judge panel led by Chief Justice Surya Kant stated that any information provided would be made public until further notice.

While addressing the petition filed by Abhishek Upadhyay, who is contesting the FIR against him in this road-rage case, the bench highlighted the necessity of balancing the accused's privacy rights with the victim's rights and the investigative agency's need for a thorough inquiry.

The bench questioned the police's rationale for needing the accused's digital footprint in a road-rage scenario.

The court instructed the Ghaziabad Police to submit an affidavit detailing the type of information required from X for the investigation, noting that Upadhyay is willing to assist with the inquiry.

Upadhyay's legal representative argued for the establishment of guidelines regarding access to an accused's social media data, as the police are currently requesting such information along with details like the IMEI number.

As the court pressed the police for justification behind their request, the agency's counsel urged the bench to consider the serious allegations made by Upadhyay against an engineer involved in the Ram temple's construction.

The lawyer questioned the regulation of journalism in light of Upadhyay's comments on police oversight.

He mentioned that there is an eyewitness account in the ongoing investigation, and if no evidence is found against the journalist, the case would be dismissed.

On August 25, the Supreme Court granted Upadhyay protection from coercive measures and ordered that he be provided with a copy of the FIR filed in Ghaziabad's Indirapuram.

In his petition, Upadhyay claimed that he has not received the FIR copy and alleged that police are pressuring local shopkeepers to erase CCTV footage from the time of the incident.

He is seeking either the dismissal of the FIR or, alternatively, a transfer of the investigation from the Uttar Pradesh Police to an independent body.