The IPI global network calls on authorities in the Indian state of Assam to immediately drop Section 152 charges against The Wire, its founding editor Siddharth Varadarajan, and senior journalist Karan Thapar, which are in clear retaliation for the outlet鈥檚 critical reporting. Further, IPI warns that the continued weaponization of Section 152, which criminalizes actions tantamount to sedition, risks creating a chilling effect on press freedom in India, and calls on the Supreme Court to take permanent steps toward preventing abuses of the law.聽
On July 11, Assam police filed a (FIR) 鈥� which serves as the prelude to a full investigation 鈥� against The Wire and Varadarajan, following a complaint from a local leader of India鈥檚 ruling Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).聽
The complaint stems from a on Operation Sindoor, which included remarks from India鈥檚 defense attach茅 to Indonesia on the reasons behind India鈥檚 loss of fighter jets during a military operation. The attach茅鈥檚 comments, which , were on across Indian media.聽
Police cited Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), India’s new criminal code, as the basis for their case against The Wire and Varadarajan. Section 152 criminalizes acts that endanger India鈥檚 “sovereignty, unity, and integrity.鈥� In a petition filed before India鈥檚 Supreme Court, counsel for The Wire and Varadarajan Section 152 is essentially a repackaged version of an old sedition law, known as Section 124A, that was abused under India鈥檚 previous criminal code to target dissidents.聽
On August 12, the Supreme Court for The Wire and Varadarajan, that police could not take coercive action against the newspaper or arrest its editor under Section 152. During arguments before the court on the case, the panel of Supreme Court whether the 鈥減otentiality of abuse鈥� of Section 152, given its vaguely-worded nature, should render it unconstitutional.聽
On the same day as the Supreme Court ruling, Assam police escalated their campaign against The Wire, filing a second FIR invoking Section 152 and naming Varadarajan and senior journalist Karan Thapar, the of the IPI India Award for Excellence in Journalism. , no details of the alleged offence were provided by police in the summonses requiring Varadarajan and Thapar to appear for questioning on August 22. In a statement, the condemned the actions of the Assam police and called for both investigations to be dropped.聽聽
The BNS came into effect in July 2024, replacing the colonial-era Indian Penal Code (IPC). In June 2021, the Supreme Court ruled that the government could not pursue sedition charges under the IPC against journalists merely for their criticism of authorities. In May 2022, the court went further, of the old sedition law, Section 124A, given its frequent use against journalists and activists.
The Wire, which won the 2021 IPI-IMS Free Media Pioneer award, is one of India鈥檚 leading independent news sites, co-founded in 2015 by Varadarajan. Known for its critical reporting on India鈥檚 political and business sectors, the outlet has been targeted repeatedly since its founding by from both the government and private entities, as well as by criminal cases.
The case against The Wire is the second high-profile instance of Section 152鈥檚 use against India鈥檚 independent media. In December 2024, authorities against Alt News co-founder Mohammed Zubair under Section 152 in retaliation for a social media post Zubair had made reporting on controversial comments made by a Hindu priest.
鈥淭he revival of India鈥檚 old sedition law 鈥� which had previously been suspended by the Supreme Court for the very same reasons we are concerned about it today 鈥� is deeply troubling,鈥� said IPI Executive Director Scott Griffen. 鈥淭he new law鈥檚 even vaguer wording raises obvious concerns about abuse 鈥� we have seen how broadly defined legal statutes can be weaponized to harass, intimidate and silence independent journalists and critical outlets.鈥�
鈥淲e welcome the Supreme Court鈥檚 interim decision on the case involving The Wire, but urge further action to prevent additional harm to India鈥檚 independent media,鈥� Griffen continued. 鈥淐ritical reporting and free expression is essential to the function of democracy. The court must act, or risk emboldening further exploitation of this law and creating a chilling effect on press freedom in India.鈥�