The Supreme Court of India has granted significant relief to Fulbright fellow and independent journalist Makepeace Sitlhou by staying the criminal proceedings against her. Sitlhou faced an FIR for her tweets related to the ethnic violence in Manipur. The decision was made by a bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud and Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Sitlhou, argued before the bench that the tweets in question were not objectionable. After reviewing the posts for which she was booked, the bench was convinced by the journalist’s plea and decided to grant her protection. The bench issued a brief order stating,
“Pending further orders, there shall be a stay in proceedings concerning the FIR against her.”
In her petition, Sitlhou sought the quashing of the FIR lodged against her under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) at the Imphal (West) police station. The complaint alleged that Sitlhou had used social media platforms to propagate misleading statements aimed at destabilizing a democratically elected government, disturbing communal harmony, and defaming the state government and a particular community.
Sitlhou contended that her tweets were critical of the government’s handling of the volatile situation and highlighted the impact of violence on ethnic groups in the Northeast. She argued that as a journalist, she had not refrained from reporting on human rights violations or acts of targeted violence against communities and ethnicities. Her petition emphasized that any restriction on her freedom as a citizen and journalist would have a chilling effect on journalism in the country.
The Supreme Court’s intervention in Sitlhou’s case is part of a broader pattern of the apex court granting protection to individuals facing legal challenges for expressing views critical of the state government in Manipur. Earlier, the court had granted interim protection from arrest to three journalists from the Editors Guild of India and stayed all criminal proceedings against them.
The court also protected a retired colonel, Dr. Vijaykant Chenji, for authoring a book, and Dr. Kham Khan Suan Hausing, a professor of political science, for an interview critical of the state government. Additionally, the court had protected two co-editors of a book commemorating the burning of a Kuki-Zo village by the British and had come to the rescue of a young lawyer involved in a fact-finding committee investigating ethnic violence in the state.
This series of interventions by the Supreme Court highlights the ongoing concerns regarding freedom of expression and the role of journalism in reporting sensitive issues in India.
