[BREAKING] Might of State should not be used against journalists or to browbeat political opinion: Supreme Court

State force should not be used to browbeat a political opinion or make journalists suffer the consequences of what is already in public domain, the Supreme Court said on Thursday while appreciating the stance of the West Bengal government in withdrawing cases against editor and reporters of online web portal OpIndia [Nupur Sharma vs State of West Bengal]..A Bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh stated in its order that in a country which prides itself on its diversity, there are bound to be different perceptions and opinions which would include political opinions."State force should never be used to either browbeat a political opinion or the journalists suffer the consequences of what is already in public domain," the Court said.However, it added that this does not take away the responsibility of the journalists in how they report the matters, more so in a “twitter age”..OpIndia editor Nupur Sharma, journalist Ajeet Bharti at OpIndia had moved the Supreme Court in June 2020 after the West Bengal Police had registered cases against them for offences under Section 153A (promoting enmity between religious groups), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace) and 505 (statements conducing to public mischief) of the Indian Penal Code.The Supreme Court had stayed three FIRs in June 2020. Subsequently, a fourth FIR was also registered which too was stayed by the top court in September 2021.The plea by Sharma and Bharti said that FIRs were registered in relation to different stories carried by the OpIndia platform, one of which is eight months old. While various other mainstream news outlets also carried articles and news pieces on the concerned subjects, the police registered FIRs only against the petitioners. Thus, the registration of the FIRs was an attempt to intimidate the journalists, the plea said.West Bengal government told the Supreme Court on Thursday that it has withdrawn the cases. .The Court noted that what OpIndia had done was to reproduce what political class had already stated against each other. "What the petitioners have done is to reproduce what the political class has stated against each other and which is already in public domain, an aspect pointed out eminently by learned senior counsel for the petitioners," the order said. The Court, therefore, proceeded to quash the FIRs in view of the submission by the State that it has decided to withdraw the same. "If at all, the stand is to be appreciated of better late than never and should be a model for others to follow," the Court said..The top court further observed that difference "in perceptions can be expressed in better language.".The court thanked West Bengal's counsel, Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave who played a "constructive role" in bringing the dispute to an end without any adverse observations from the top court.Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani and advocate Ravi Sharma appeared for Sharma and Bharti..[Read Order]