The Delhi High Court has quashed an FIR against an investigative journalist under the Official Secrets Act, marking a major victory for press freedom and free speech in India.

A Landmark Ruling for Press Freedom in India

In a major win for democratic values and the rights of the media, the Delhi High Court has quashed a First Information Report (FIR) filed against an investigative journalist under the Official Secrets Act (OSA). The journalist had published leaked government documents related to sensitive defense procurements.

Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani: Publishing Public Interest Documents Is Not a Crime

Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani, while hearing a joint plea by the journalist and a prominent media watchdog, stated that mere possession or publication of documents—if of public importance—does not violate the OSA. He emphasized that such actions are not criminal unless there is clear evidence of espionage or intent to harm national security.

Background: FIR Filed After Journalist Exposed Defense Irregularities

The FIR, originally filed in 2024, followed a series of investigative reports by the journalist that revealed alleged irregularities in defense procurement deals. These articles were based on internal files from the Ministry of Defence. While the government claimed the leaked documents posed a national security risk, several civil society organizations argued the exposé served the public interest.

Reaffirming the Right to Free Speech and Journalistic Integrity

The ruling is a significant reinforcement of the Supreme Court’s precedent in the landmark Vinod Dua judgment. The High Court emphasized that the right to report on matters of national relevance cannot be suppressed by the misuse of outdated secrecy laws like the OSA.

Court Urges Clearer Guidelines for Press and National Security Balance

The Court also directed the Central Government to establish clear, updated guidelines to ensure a fair balance between protecting national interests and respecting press freedom.

Verdict Welcomed by Media Rights Groups

The decision has been widely praised by media rights groups and legal experts as a reaffirmation that investigative journalism is not a threat to the state—it is a vital pillar of a transparent and democratic society. The verdict sends a strong message that journalism is not sedition or spying, but a safeguard of public accountability.