The Supreme Court on Thursday granted four weeks’ interim bail to journalist Abhisar Sharma, facing criminal charges over a YouTube post in which he had highlighted a Gauhati High Court reprimand of the Assam government for allotting 3,000 bighas of tribal land to the Adani group, allegedly in violation of tribal and environmental safeguards.
A bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh directed Sharma to approach the high court for quashing the FIR but agreed to tag the larger constitutional validity of Section 152 with pending challenges to the sedition law.
Initially reluctant to hear Sharma’s plea, the bench relented after senior advocate Kapil Sibal argued: “Society looks up to the Supreme Court, please don’t do this.” Sibal also cited earlier relief granted to journalists Sidharth Varadarajan and Karan Thapar in similar cases.
Sharma, represented by advocate Sumeer Sodhi, said he was booked under Sections 152, 196 (promoting enmity) and 197 (imputations prejudicial to national integration) following his August 18 video titled “When the judge reprimanded the BJP government! Why thousands bigha land to Adani?” He argued that the video, based on court proceedings, questioned government decisions affecting tribal rights and environmental protection. The FIR was lodged on August 21 on a private complaint.
The petition described Sharma as a journalist with 30 years of experience, winner of the Ramnath Goenka Award, the Red Ink Award and the Hindi Sahitya Award. His YouTube channel, with 90 lakh subscribers and over 301 crore views, carries critical reportage. He has earlier worked with India Today, Zee News, BBC, NDTV, Aaj Tak and ABP News.
According to Sharma, the video criticised governance failures and divisive rhetoric but did not advocate violence or disorder. He emphasised that criticism of elected representatives is constitutionally protected. “The reference to Ram Rajya was metaphorical, highlighting the gap between proclaimed ideals and governance. At no point was religion disparaged,” the plea said.
The petition stressed that the remarks were backed by documented speeches of the Assam chief minister and aimed to reduce, not inflame, communal divisions. It added: “The FIR discloses no offence and is a clear misuse of criminal law to target journalistic expression. Section 152 exemplifies unconstitutional vagueness and must face judicial scrutiny.”
The bench granted Sharma four weeks’ protection to enable him to seek relief before the high court and posted the matter, along with the pending challenges to Section 152, for further consideration.