Back
Grants Journalist Satyam Verma in Noida Protest Case on with Co-accused
The on Tuesday granted to journalist Satyam Verma in one of the eleven criminal cases lodged against him in connection with the Noida workers' protest. The relief was awarded on the ground of with co-accused Shiv Kumar, who had been granted in the same case on . Despite this order, Verma remains in due to other pending cases and a separate detention under the stringent .
A single-judge bench of Justice Krishan Pahal allowed Verma's application in Case Crime No. 164 of 2026, registered at a police station in Gautam Buddh Nagar. The FIR invoked several provisions of the and the . The court, while granting , relied on the principle of , noting that the co-accused Shiv Kumar had already been released on earlier this year.
The Argument
The High Court's order in Shiv Kumar's application, which served as the basis for Verma's relief, observed that Shiv Kumar was not named in the FIR and that the FIR had been lodged against an unidentified mob. Shiv Kumar had been in custody since . Applying the same reasoning, Justice Pahal held that Verma had made out a case for . The court specifically considered the nature of the offence, the evidence available, the of the accused, and the , while making it clear that it was not expressing any opinion on the .
" I am of the considered view that applicant has made a case for . The application is allowed ," the court stated in its order, mirroring the earlier ruling in Shiv Kumar's case.
Background of the Protest
The Noida workers' protest erupted in when thousands of factory workers demanded a wage hike and improved working conditions, spurred by a 35% wage increase in neighboring Haryana. What began as a peaceful demonstration soon turned violent, with reports of vehicle burning, road blockades, trespassing, and stone pelting in several parts of the city. Police responded with a lathi-charge, detaining hundreds of workers and at least seven activists.
Satyam Verma, editor of the labour-oriented publication Mazdoor Bigul Dasta , was arrested in Lucknow on , in connection with cases arising from the protest. The alleged that Verma played a key role in inciting violence, arson, and disorder by provoking people across various areas. He was subsequently booked under the National Security Act on , along with student activist Akriti Chaudhary.
NSA Detention and Judicial Scrutiny
Verma's continued detention under the NSA remains a significant hurdle to his release. Notably, Akriti Chaudhary's NSA detention was quashed by the on . A division bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Achal Sachdev found that the grounds for her detention under the NSA did not contain a "single shred of evidence" against her. The court ordered ₹5 lakh compensation to be recovered from the salaries of the officials responsible for the illegal detention.
In a strongly worded order, the bench criticized Noida District Magistrate Medha Roopam for the manner in which the detention order was passed, highlighting the lack of substantive material justifying the . This ruling has raised questions about the of using the NSA against journalists and activists in the context of industrial protests.
Verma's legal team, led by , has argued that the charges against him are similarly unsupported by evidence. However, with multiple criminal cases still pending and the NSA order yet to be challenged, his immediate release remains uncertain.
Legal Implications for Journalists and Activists
The case underscores the growing tension between the state's power to maintain public order and the fundamental rights of journalists and activists to report and participate in lawful protests. The grant of on grounds is a procedural victory, but the continued use of the NSA against Verma signals a broader pattern of invoking stringent laws to suppress dissent.
Legal experts note that the High Court's earlier decision to quash Akriti Chaudhary's NSA detention sets a strong precedent. If Verma's NSA order is similarly challenged, the court may apply the same regarding the lack of evidence and . The requirement that detention orders must be based on concrete material, not mere allegations, is a cornerstone of jurisprudence.
Furthermore, the order in the criminal case reinforces the principle that is a valid ground for release when co-accused with similar roles have been granted . This may encourage other arrested protesters and activists to seek on the same basis.
Conclusion
While the 's order provides partial relief to Satyam Verma, his ordeal is far from over. The journalist remains in custody under the NSA, and his legal battle is likely to continue in the coming months. The case highlights the delicate balance between lawful protest and state action, and the judiciary's role in safeguarding individual liberties against . For the legal community, the judgment serves as a reminder that even in cases involving serious allegations, the principles of and must not be abandoned.
