Delhi High Court refuses stay on journalist probe over alleged casteist remarks

The Delhi High Court declined to stay the investigation against two journalists over alleged casteist remarks. Its decision keeps the probe active while the police and complainant prepare responses.Image used for representational purposes onlyNewdelhi,Oct 27, 2026 13:38 ISTThe Delhi High Court on Tuesday refused to stay the investigation into a case against a woman journalist over alleged casteist remarks and the public humiliation of a police officer during a protest near Jantar Mantar earlier this month, news agency Press Trust of India reported.The court issued notices to the Delhi Police and Assistant Commissioner of Police Vivek Bhagat, who filed the complaint, on the journalist's petition seeking to quash the first information report. It asked them to submit their replies before the next hearing on November 16.Justice Mini Pushkarna clarified that the court was neither rejecting the journalist's request for interim relief nor passing an order on it at this stage.“I am not rejecting any prayer as of now. I am only issuing notice to them. The matter needs consideration; list for final hearing on November 16,” the judge said. The woman journalist had earlier filed a sexual assault complaint against Bhagat. The Delhi Police Crime Branch is investigating her complaint.Her lawyer argued that the FIR based on Bhagat's complaint was registered to intimidate her and prevent her from pursuing the complaint against him, PTI reported. The High Court passed a similar order on a separate petition filed by a male colleague of the journalist, who also sought the quashing of the FIR registered against him.Delhi Police registered the FIR against the independent journalist and others following a complaint by Bhagat, who is posted in the Connaught Place sub-division of the New Delhi district. He alleged that casteist remarks were made against him and that he was publicly humiliated and defamed during the protest.The case was registered under relevant provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Sections 221, 356(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. These sections relate to obstructing a public servant from carrying out official duties, defamation and common intention.The court has, therefore, allowed the investigation to continue for now while seeking responses from the Delhi Police and Bhagat before taking up the petitions for final hearing on November 16.- Ends