PolicySupreme Court
Supreme Court quashes Ghaziabad police demand to X for journalist Abhishek Upadhyay's data
Police had sought three months of account data from before an alleged road-rage incident. The court called it excessive and barred any use of what was collected.
Key points
- The court quashed a police notice to X seeking three months of account data from before the alleged incident.
- Nothing obtained through the notice can be used against Upadhyay, the bench ordered.
- His protection from arrest was made absolute, and his seized car must be returned within two days.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday quashed a notice from Ghaziabad police asking X for months of data on journalist Abhishek Upadhyay’s account, and ordered that nothing gathered through it may be used against him.
“Seizing data of 3 months prior to date of alleged incident seems to be an overkill,” Justice Joymalya Bagchi said during the hearing before a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant.
The case
Upadhyay, an investigative journalist who reported on alleged misuse of donations to the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi temple trust, is accused in an FIR at Indirapuram police station of hitting a motorcyclist with his car near Shipra Mall, threatening the complainant and making casteist remarks. He denies the allegations and says the incident was staged in retaliation for his reporting.
Police then wrote to X seeking his login and logout IP addresses, email ID, IMEI number and registration logs, going back about three months before the incident. The Ghaziabad Police Commissioner told the court in an affidavit that the notice was meant to trace and arrest him. The bench found that explanation did not match what the notice actually asked for.
What the court ordered
The bench held that no confidential or personal information can be sought for the period before the alleged incident, and that even for the period after the FIR it may be sought only if other means are inadequate. It made absolute the protection from coercive action granted on 25 August, as long as Upadhyay cooperates with the investigation, and directed police to release his seized vehicle within two days.
The court did not rule on the FIR itself, leaving Upadhyay free to challenge it before the High Court. Senior advocate Pradeep Rai, appearing for him, had also sought guidelines on how police seize digital data. The bench said that question should be raised in a suitable petition, with the Union government made a party.