The SIT probing the assault case has been accused of illegally seizing journalists' phones and issuing summons over WhatsApp after the survivor's identity was revealed following a glitch at the police's end.
Published Feb 02, 2025 | 10:56 PM ⚊ Updated Feb 03, 2025 | 11:52 AM
Chennai press club protest against the recent seizure of phones by the police
It was reportedly a technical glitch at the government’s end that revealed the identity of the survivor in the Anna University sexual assault case. And journalists, who reported quoting the FIR, are at the receiving end.
The rape of a student on the Anna University campus in Chennai has taken an unexpected twist with the Special Investigation Team (SIT) seizing the mobile phones of at least three journalists and summoning many others for questioning.
The Madras High Court-constituted all-women SIT is probing the assault on the student, allegedly by a roadside biryani vendor, and the unauthorised and illegal disclosure of the survivor’s identity.
The student’s identity was revealed following a technical glitch at the government’s end, reports said.
Following the seizure of the phones of journalists and summons to several others, questions have been raised over the freedom of the media and journalists’ rights.
Condemning the police action, the Press Club of Chennai shot off a letter to the Tamil Nadu police chief, DIG Shankar Jiwal, and expressed concerns over the repeated harassment of journalists by the SIT.
The letter, signed by Press Club president M Suresh Vethanayagam, and General Secretary M Haseef Aransei, highlighted the unlawful summons via WhatsApp under Sections 179 and 94 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, despite the Supreme Court’s ruling that such a method is invalid.
Journalists, who appeared before the SIT, were subjected to intrusive questioning about their personal lives and finances, forced to wait for hours without justification, and had their mobile phones confiscated, raising fears of data tampering.
The Press Club condemned the actions as an overreach of police powers and an attempt to intimidate the press and emphasised that journalists were not obstructing the investigation but were ready to cooperate in a lawful and dignified manner.
— Chennai Press Club | சென்னை பத்திரிகையாளர் மன்றம் (@MadrasJournos) January 30, 2025
Chennai Press Club’s petition to SIT
In a petition to SIT on 31 January, the Press Club highlighted the harassment of journalists and legal irregularities in the ongoing investigation. It also demanded that journalists should not be subjected to undue harassment under the guise of legal inquiries.
The petition criticised the SIT’s practice of summoning journalists via WhatsApp, though it acknowledged that the SIT had shifted to sending summons by post after widespread criticism. However, concerns remained regarding the prolonged waiting periods at SIT’s office, repeated questions on personal matters, and the confiscation of mobile phones without legal acknowledgment, which violated privacy and threatened professional confidentiality.
The Press Club pointed at the Supreme Court’s stay on certain Madras High Court observations related to the FIR leak case, questioning the SIT’s approach in light of this development.
It urged the SIT to broaden its investigation to include all parties involved in the FIR’s technical handling, rather than unfairly targeting media professionals.
The Editors Guild of India (EGI) issued a statement on 31 January, expressing concerns over how the Chennai police conducted the investigation.
The Guild highlighted that journalists had merely accessed a First Information Report (FIR) from a government website, a routine part of journalistic work.
“While the Guild adheres to the principle and the law that media cannot divulge any personal details of a victim of a sexual assault, we are also concerned by how investigation against journalists is being conducted by the Chennai police,” the statement read.
The Guild also raised concerns about the legality of the process, pointing out that summons had been served through WhatsApp, a practice the Supreme Court had ruled invalid. Additionally, journalists involved in the case reported being subjected to intrusive questioning.
The statement further recalled the Supreme Court’s 2023 directive to frame guidelines for the search and seizure of journalists’ digital devices, emphasising the lack of legal clarity in such actions.
The Guild also cited the NewsClick case, where the Delhi police had confiscated the devices of several journalists in 2023. The devices were yet to be returned.
EGI Statement on the seizure of mobile phones of journalists by Chennai police pic.twitter.com/1nFHL9MsWc
— Editors Guild of India (@IndEditorsGuild) January 31, 2025
The Guild urged the central government to frame guidelines regarding the search and seizure of the devices.
In a statement, the Chennai Press Club said that seizing the mobile phones of journalists without due process violated their Constitutional rights.
“Journalists are being treated as suspects when they are merely doing their job. The law enforcement agencies must ensure they do not infringe on the rights of the press under the guise of investigation,” the statement read.
The Press Club also urged the Tamil Nadu government to:
அன்பார்ந்த உறுப்பினர்கள் அனைவருக்கும் இனிய ஆங்கிலப் புத்தாண்டு வாழ்த்துகள்.
ஜனவரி 1, 2025 முதல் மன்றம் நடைமுறைப்படுத்த உள்ள புதிய திட்டங்கள் குறித்த அறிவிப்பு.#chennaipressclub pic.twitter.com/gDBABsivHp
— Chennai Press Club | சென்னை பத்திரிகையாளர் மன்றம் (@MadrasJournos) December 30, 2024
On 1 February, journalists and activists staged a protest demonstration near Anna University against the law enforcement agencies targeting journalists instead of focusing on ensuring justice for the survivor.
“A journalist’s phone is not just personal property—it’s a repository of confidential sources, from a tea vendor to a neighbour. When questioned, one of the arrested individuals rightly asked, ‘Isn’t it my duty as a crime reporter to share such information?’ That’s the very essence of journalism. The key question remains: under what legal grounds are these phones being taken when it’s neither necessary nor justified?” a senior journalist, who did not wish to be identified asked.
“The police portal is at the center of this issue because the information in question was first sent through it and reached journalists, some of whom are now being unfairly treated as if they are accused. The police claim the three arrested individuals are witnesses, yet their phones have been seized, and they’re being treated like suspects. This is deeply concerning,” he added.
Another journalist, who also wished to remain anonymous, said journalists have the right to pursue the truth.
“Our aim and agenda are to bring facts to light and ensure people are informed. It is highly inappropriate to seize phones from journalists just because authorities fear that the truth might come out,” he added.
(Edited by Majnu Babu).