The Supreme Court Today (Aug 28) protected journalist Abhisar Sharma from arrest for 4 weeks in the Assam FIR case over his YouTube video. The Court refused to quash the FIR but allowed him to challenge it in Gauhati High Court.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India granted interim protection from arrest for 4 weeks to senior journalist Abhisar Sharma, who is facing a criminal case filed by the Assam Police over a YouTube video in which he criticised the State government.
The case against Sharma involves serious charges under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), including endangering the sovereignty of the nation, promoting enmity between groups, and making statements prejudicial to national integration.
However, while granting protection, the top court made it clear that it would not quash the First Information Report (FIR) at this stage. Instead, Sharma has been directed to move the Gauhati High Court.
During the hearing, the Bench of Justices MM Sundresh and N Kotiswar Singh made an oral observation:
“FIR you challenge before the high court. Why are you bypassing the High Court? We’ll give you protection you go to the High Court. Just because you are a journalist…”
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, who appeared for Sharma, argued that the police might register several cases against him on the same issue.
He told the Court:
“Some uniformity has to be there. They will lodge another FIR.”
In response, Justice Sundresh remarked:
“Even if we entertain, they will lodge another FIR.”
Despite this, Sibal strongly requested the Court to quash the FIR to send a message in favour of free press. He emotionally submitted:
“Society looks up to this Court. Please don’t do this. This is not done. What message are we sending?”
But the Court declined to accept that prayer. Instead, it recorded its decision:
“So far as challenge to FIR is concerned, we are not inclined to interfere. However, we are inclined to give interim protection to the petitioner for a period of 4 weeks so he can approach the High Court.”
Sharma has also raised a bigger constitutional issue by challenging Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which deals with the offence of endangering the sovereignty of the nation.
On this limited point, the Court has issued notice to the Central Government and linked his petition with other similar cases that are already pending before it.
“Notice and tag on with respect to the challenge to the vires of the Act,”
-the Court stated.
The FIR against Sharma was lodged on August 21 for a YouTube video in which he accused the Assam government of giving away 3,000 bighas of tribal land to a private company and alleged that it was indulging in divisive politics.
The charges invoked against him include:
- Section 152 BNS – Endangering sovereignty of the nation
- Section 196 BNS – Promoting enmity between groups
- Section 197 BNS – Making statements prejudicial to national integration
According to the FIR, Sharma is accused of mocking the government, ridiculing the idea of Ram Rajya, and making remarks that could harm national unity.
However, Sharma’s petition has strongly contested these allegations. It claims that the FIR is a misuse of sedition-like provisions to silence a journalist. The petition explains that his video was based on verifiable facts and clips of the Assam Chief Minister’s speeches, and that he never called for violence or public disorder.
The plea further argues that in a democracy, criticism of government policies or political strategies cannot be treated as a criminal offence under Section 152 BNS. It stresses that elected governments must always remain open to public criticism.
Moreover, the petition describes Section 152 BNS as nothing but a reincarnation of the old sedition law (Section 124A IPC), which was already repealed. It says the law is vague, overbroad, and open to misuse, and hence violates Articles 14, 19(1)(a), and 21 of the Constitution.
The plea also emphasises that using a law carrying life imprisonment against a journalist’s video is grossly disproportionate. According to Sharma, his right to free speech and press freedom is being targeted, and the State cannot misuse criminal laws as retaliation against critical journalism.
- The petition has been filed through Advocate Sumeer Sodhi.
| Law / Section | What It Says (Simple Explanation) | Punishment | Relevance in Abhisar Sharma Case |
|---|---|---|---|
| Section 152, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) | Endangering the sovereignty, unity, or integrity of India. Similar to the old sedition law (Section 124A IPC). | Can extend to life imprisonment or imprisonment up to 7 years + fine. | Used in FIR against Sharma for allegedly making statements that question the sovereignty of the nation. He has challenged this section as unconstitutional. |
| Section 196, BNS | Promoting hatred, enmity, or ill-will between different groups based on religion, caste, language, etc. | Imprisonment up to 3 years, or fine, or both. | Invoked against Sharma for allegedly promoting division in society through his video. |
| Section 197, BNS | Making statements that can harm national integration and unity. | Imprisonment up to 3 years, or fine, or both. | Invoked against Sharma for allegedly mocking Ram Rajya and ridiculing the government, said to affect unity. |
| Section 124A, Indian Penal Code (IPC) [Repealed] | Sedition – words that bring hatred or disaffection towards government. (Now replaced under BNS). | Life imprisonment or 3 years imprisonment + fine (before repeal). | Sharma’s petition says Section 152 BNS is just a “repackaged sedition law” and violates free speech rights. |
| Articles 14, 19(1)(a), and 21 of the Constitution of India | Article 14 – Right to Equality; Article 19(1)(a) – Right to Freedom of Speech & Expression; Article 21 – Right to Life and Personal Liberty. | Constitutional rights – no direct punishment. They act as safeguards. | Sharma argues that Section 152 BNS violates these rights because it is vague, misused, and unfairly curbs free speech. |
Case Title: Abhisar Sharma vs Union of India & Ors.
Case Number: W.P. (Crl.) No. 338/2025
READ LIVE COVERAGE:
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Journalist
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Abhisar Sharma
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
