The Madras High Court on Tuesday, February 4, criticised the nature of a questionnaire given to four journalists by a Special Investigation Team investigating the Anna University sexual assault case. Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan questioned why the personal details of the journalists were being collected when it was the police who uploaded the First Information Report. The court said it would pass a detailed order on this issue.
The journalists had earlier alleged that the Tamil Nadu police harassed them under the guise of investigating the FIR ‘leak’. TNM accessed the questionnaire given to them by the police and it contains questions about their personal lives, including their salaries, families and foreign travel and questions that seem to arraign them as responsible for the leak.
It was on December 23 that a student of Anna University was sexually assaulted on campus. Following this, the FIR of the case was uploaded to the Tamil Nadu police website and made available for public view. This was later downloaded by journalists.
While cases of a sensitive nature cannot be accessed or viewed by the public, the FIR was uploaded on the police website. Greater Chennai City Police Commissioner A Arun attributed technical glitches in the transition from the Indian Penal Code (IPC) to the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) as the reason for the leak. Usually, such FIRs would get automatically locked in the Crime and Criminal Tracking Network Systems (CCTNS) so that they remain hidden from public view.
But four journalists were questioned by the Tamil Nadu police for downloading the FIR and their mobile phones were seized.
As part of the questioning, the journalists were given a questionnaire, which sought unrelated details, including the whereabouts of friends and family members, nature of their occupation, salary, bank accounts, number of foreign visits, and details of movable and immovable properties, among other things.
One question reads, “Who told you that you can download the FIR of the Kotturpuram All Women Police Station?” Another question goes, “As per Section 72 of BNS 2023, it is a crime to reveal the name of the survivors/affected in cases of sexual assault and others. If you knew it was a punishable offence to reveal the details, why did you download the FIR?”
A petition filed by the journalists in the Madras High Court stated that they have never disclosed the details of the survivor published in the leaked FIR in any of their news coverage.
As part of the questioning, the journalists were given a questionnaire, which sought unrelated details, including the whereabouts of friends and family members, nature of their occupation, salary, bank accounts, number of foreign visits, and details of movable and immovable properties, among other things.
The journalists were also asked from which website the FIR was viewed or downloaded, whether they have viewed/downloaded/taken a screenshot of an FIR in the past, was the FIR forwarded to any WhatsApp group, the number of FIRs downloaded from the CCTNS website in the past five years, and the mobile number used, among other things.
The questionnaire also sought the motive behind the journalists viewing or downloading the FIRs. It asked whether the journalists received money to download the FIR. “Did you receive/take money from someone to download this FIR? If yes, please give details of the transaction,” reads one question.
The questionnaire further attempted to record whether the journalists were in contact with the survivor, the accused, and those related to him. “Do you have any information that you want to share (with us) regarding the sexual assault case? Did you seek permission from the survivor before revealing the details of the case? You know the consequences of revealing the details of survivors. Important cases…,” the questionnaire reads.
But the questions did not stop there. The journalists were asked how many foreign trips they had been to and who accompanied them, as well as the details of their contacts with fellow journalists. It also sought details of their social media accounts including X, Facebook, Instagram, and Telegram, and what messenger services they use. The journalists were also asked to share screenshots of the FIR document and explain how they were able to find it online. “Have you viewed/downloaded/taken a screenshot of a FIR in the past?”, a question read.
The SIT also wanted to know from where the journalists sourced the information from. “What is the proof of the information you shared? If yes, please reveal the identity of the person (source) with details. If no, give the reason why you shared the information?”, a question read.
Criticising the SIT for its actions, the court asked why were the journalists being harassed. “How many other people besides the journalists were summoned? Had police officers involved in the investigation also been questioned? Since the police uploaded the FIR on the website, why are resources being wasted without investigating the correct individuals?”, the bench added.
The Tamil Nadu police’s investigation of the FIR leak had drawn scathing criticism from other journalists and press clubs. An editorial by The Hindu said that the police should summon those who shared the details on social media instead of questioning journalists who downloaded the FIR from the Internet.
“What makes the episode an instance of harassment is that the journalists were subjected to intrusive and distasteful questioning. Instead of probing how and why the FIR leaked, the SIT is trying to find out whether they had put it in the public domain. The High Court had already been told that the FIR was inadvertently uploaded, because of a technical issue, on the Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems before being taken down,” the editorial read.
In a statement, the Editors Guild of India demanded the Chennai police to immediately return all the devices of journalists, and conduct the investigation not prejudicial to the rights of journalists and press freedom.
EGI Statement on seizure of mobile phones of journalists by Chennai police pic.twitter.com/1nFHL9MsWc
— Editors Guild of India (@IndEditorsGuild) January 31, 2025
“It has come to our notice that the summons were sent to journalists through WhatsApp, which the Supreme Court has ruled is an invalid means of serving the legal notices. Further, the journalists have claimed that the questioning was intrusive,” the Guild’s statement read.
The Chennai press club also urged the police to stop “harassing and intimidating law-abiding journalists who are cooperating with the investigation” and demanded the immediate return of all seized mobile phones and electronic items.
With journalists and journalism under threat, we need your help. Click here to subscribe to Newslaundry, and power journalism that is truly in public interest.
Newslaundry is a reader-supported, ad-free, independent news outlet based out of New Delhi. Support their journalism, here.
