Religious fundamentalism and militancy cannot be criminalized for journalistic coverage, asserts Gauhati High Court.
In a landmark ruling, the Gauhati High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings against a journalist in the case Kongkon Borthakur vs. The State of Assam & Anr. (2025). The court's decision, made on August 7, has set a precedent for journalistic freedom in the region.
The case revolved around a newspaper article published in 2016, which was alleged to have promoted disharmony between communities. However, the article itself is not further discussed in this article.
The Gauhati High Court held that raising concerns about illegal migrants, religious fundamentalism, militant activities, and demographic threats to indigenous people cannot be considered as an attempt to create enmity between groups or incite violence. Thus, journalistic reporting on sensitive social issues, even if controversial, does not automatically attract criminal liability under Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code.
Justice Pranjal Das emphasized that it is the core duty of journalism to highlight burning societal issues. He stated that penal provisions like Section 153A must not be mechanically invoked against journalists merely for expressing inconvenient truths or unpopular opinions. The court observed that freedom of speech is not absolute, but the threshold for criminal liability under Section 153A is high; mere discussion or reportage of contentious topics does not suffice for prosecution.
This ruling strikes a balance between protecting free expression and safeguarding communal harmony, ensuring genuine journalistic work done in good faith is not criminalized simply because it raises uncomfortable questions. The FIR and resultant criminal proceedings against Kongkon Borthakur were accordingly quashed by the Court.
The case was heard at the Gauhati High Court, with the journalist being the defendant and the State of Assam being one of the respondents. It is important to note that the Gauhati High Court has not made any new rulings or decisions regarding the case since this ruling.
This ruling serves as a reminder of the importance of a free press in a democratic society and the need to protect journalists from unwarranted criminal proceedings for their work.
[1] Source 1 [2] Source 2 [3] Source 4 [4] Source 5 [5] Source 1, Source 2, Source 5 (for the summary)
Read also:
- United States tariffs pose a threat to India, necessitating the recruitment of adept negotiators or strategists, similar to those who had influenced Trump's decisions.
- Weekly happenings in the German Federal Parliament (Bundestag)
- Southwest region's most popular posts, accompanied by an inquiry:
- Discussion between Putin and Trump in Alaska could potentially overshadow Ukraine's concerns
