Freedom of the press cannot be used as “a shield for irresponsible journalism, intimidation or the dissemination of content that jeopardises public order”, the Delhi High Court said on Thursday.
Justice Girish Kathpalia made the observations while granting bail to two persons accused of assaulting two freelance YouTubers who make news content.
The alleged incident took place on July 4, 2025, when two persons claiming to be “from media” were recording videos in an unauthorised colony in Delhi’s Seemapuri area.
They were allegedly assaulted by a few residents, who also damaged their motorcycle and took away their belongings including their mobile phones.
A first information report was lodged the following day based on the allegations.
The prosecution argued that the attack amounted to an assault on press freedom.
However, the court noted that the complainants were not associated with any accredited media organisation and were working as freelancers for a YouTube channel.
The court said the complainants’ decision not to inform the police before beginning the recording exercise did not justify the alleged assault. However, it added that the broader question raised by the prosecution, that the attack amounted to an assault on press freedom, required consideration.
In its order, the court said the rapid growth of social media and digital platforms had resulted in a significant section of the media becoming “largely unregulated and unorganised”.
“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,” the judge observed.
He added that it had become increasingly common for “self-styled reporters” to aggressively approach citizens with microphones and demand immediate responses. When individuals chose not to respond, which was their right, such silence was sometimes portrayed as an attempt to avoid questions.
“Such conduct creates misleading public narrative and generates unwarranted public pressure,” the court said.
It also cautioned against selective reporting, sensationalism and unverified allegations targeting social groups, saying such practices could deepen divisions, inflame public sentiment and potentially lead to communal disharmony or public disorder.
“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,” the court said.
Written by Sara Varghese. Edited by Tanya Shrivastava.
You’ve read Scroll.
Now help sustain it
Scroll is funded by readers, not corporate owners. If you believe our work matters, support our newsroom. Become a member today!
We’re not driven by clicks or corporate interests – just honest, independent reporting. Keep us going. Support Scroll today!