Anna University Sexual Assault Case | Madras High Court Asks SIT Not To Harass Journalists, Orders Return Of Seized Electronic Devices

The Madras High Court on Tuesday (February 4th) slammed the Special Investigation Team probing the sexual assault of a 2nd Year Engineering Student at Anna University in Chennai in December last year. Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan questioned the SIT for sending summons repeatedly to the journalists grilling them with questions touching upon their personal lives and even seizing their electronic devices alleging that the journalists had shared the FIR containing details of the victim girl. The court asked the SIT why it had selectively questioned the journalists when it had not made attempts to question the officers who were responsible for the FIR leak. When the Additional Government Pleader KMD Muhilan informed the court that the SIT had only inquired about details regarding downloading of the FIR and sharing it and had not harassed the journalists, the court remarked that there was no question of forwarding when the FIR was uploaded in the website by the public itself. The court added that the Station House Officer of the respective police station or the officer responsible for authoring the FIR should have been examined first. The court also criticized the manner in which the SIT had even sought the personal details of the journalists including names of their forefathers. “Why are you harassing journalists? You can't ask for family details like names of forefathers. You cannot harass. Why are you seizing mobile phones? You have made it available in the public domain and now you are saying that they have forwarded it. Where is the question of forwarding? You have to return the devices. Why are you sending multiple summons? Have you examined the police officer who had authored the FIR and uploaded it to the website?” the court asked. The journalists had approached the High Court alleging that the SIT had been harassing them without any materials. The petitioners argued that they were within their rights to publish and circulate information that was available publicly and their rights were protected under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution. The petitioners also argued that it was the Tamil Nadu police who had uploaded the FIR in the public domain in the Tamil Nadu Police website CCTNS and made it public and that the petitioners had never revealed the identity of the victim. The petitioners also pointed out that while they had appeared before the SIT and cooperated with the investigation, the SIT had been posing irrelevant questions to them against their rights. The petitioners also pointed out that under the guise of the stay granted by the Supreme Court, the SIT had not been probing against the police officials. The petitioner submitted that the SC in its order had made it clear that the pendency of the SLP would not come in the way of the investigation being carried out by the SIT and only the departmental inquiry had been stayed. Thus, the petitioners argued that the SIT was selectively questioning the journalists while not raising any such questions to the officers concerned. The petitioner further argued that the SIT had also failed to follow the mandatory procedure provided under the BNSS for seizure. It was submitted that the SIT had made forcible seizure from the reporters as per their whims and fancies and in violation of the Right to Privacy and Right against Self Incrimination guaranteed under Article 20(30 and Article 21 of the Constitution. Case Title: V Ramkumar and Others v The Government of Tamil Nadu and Others Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 45 Case No: WP 3968 of 2025Click Here To Read/Download The Judgment

Anna University Sexual Assault Case | Madras High Court Asks SIT Not To Harass Journalists, Orders Return Of Seized Electronic Devices

Upasana Sajeev

Tags