During the proceedings, the prosecution argued that the assault on the complainant and his colleague amounted to an attack on the freedom of the press. File
| Photo Credit: The Hindu
The Delhi High Court has observed that nowadays 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.
Justice Girish Kathpalia made the observation on July 16, 2026 while granting bail to two persons allegedly involved in assaulting two reporters freelancing for a YouTube channel. The reporters were recording a video at a place of worship in Delhi’s Seemapuri area that was allegedly constructed without authorisation.
According to court records, the incident took place on July 4, 2025. The recording agitated local residents, who allegedly attacked the reporters and even chased them into a bus they had boarded to escape. The mob, allegedly including the two accused, entered the bus and assaulted the reporters.
Observing that “it was apparently a mass fury and, as mentioned above, involvement of the present accused/applicants in the alleged assault remains a grey area,” the court granted bail to the two accused.
During the proceedings, the prosecution argued that the assault on the complainant and his colleague amounted to an attack on the freedom of the press. The court, however, noted that the reporters were not associated with any accredited news organisation but were freelancing for a YouTube channel.
“Despite the sensitivity of the issue, the complainant (reporters) apparently opted not to take the local police into confidence before starting their venture, though that cannot at all justify the attack on them by the agitated locals,” Justice Kathpalia said.
The judge observed that in recent years, with the rapid proliferation of social media and digital platforms, a significant section of the media has become largely unregulated and unorganised.
“It has become increasingly common for such self-styled reporters to aggressively thrust microphones at citizens, demanding instant responses. When the person chooses to remain silent or refuses to comment, which is a right of every citizen, the so-called reporter often turns to the camera and declares that the individual is evading questions,” the judge said, adding, “Such conduct creates a misleading public narrative and generates unwarranted public pressure.”
“Of course, the freedom of the press must remain zealously protected. But it cannot become a shield for irresponsible journalism, intimidation or the dissemination of content that jeopardises public order,” Justice Kathpalia said.
He added, “The time has come for the legislature to consider an appropriate regulatory framework that preserves the freedom of the press while ensuring professional accountability, ethical standards, and respect for the rule of law, the rights of citizens, and the larger public interest.”
Published – July 17, 2026 01:14 pm IST
