Investigative reports registered by law enforcement are public documents. Accurate media reporting of such records does not inherently violate privacy rights or constitute an unfair trial, absent clear evidence of malice or violation of specific sensitive protections.

JUDGMENT :

Bhaskar Raj Pradhan, J.

1. The petitioner who is being investigated under the Bharatiya Nayaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) desires to raise an issue of privacy in his favour. The State Police has registered a First Information Report (FIR) on 11.02.2026 against him involving various offences under sections 68, 75, 64, 351 of the .

2. According to the petitioner, the fourth respondent i.e. Sikkim Chronicle published a news report regarding the registration of the FIR against the petitioner. According to the said report it was based on the Police Daily Situation Report. Therefore, the petition impugnes the alleged action of the State Police in disclosing the petitioner’s name and the contents of the FIR to Sikkim Chronicle. The petitioner seeks a direction upon the State respondents not to disclose investigative material relating to the petitioner to the media or any third party during the pendency of the investigation. The petitioner also prays that the Sikkim Chronicle be directed to remove all publications relating to the FIR naming him and his minor son and restrain Sikkim Chronicle from further publishing prejudicial, accusatory, or investigative content concerning the petitioner during the pendency of investigation and trial. Consequently, the petitioner prays for a direction for appropriate inquiry into unauthorised disclosure of police investigative material to media and fix responsibility upon the concerned officials. The petitioner further seeks the protection of the identity, privacy and dignity of the petitioner’s minor child and restraining order that no further disclosure identifying the minor be passed.

3. At the preliminary hearing on perusal of the pleadings and the materials filed by the petitioner, this Court was of the view that it did not call for issuing notice upon Sikkim Chronicle at that stage. The matter was thereafter listed today.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 3.

5. The impugned news report (Annexure-P1) is a part of the present petition. The report, prima facie, reflects the contents of the FIR.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Youth Bar Association of India vs. Union of India & Anr., (2016) 9 SCC 473 as well as the direction in order dated 15.01.2026 in Peoples Union for Civil Liberties & Anr. vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors., 2026 INSC 79 along with the copy of the Police Manual for Media Briefing filed on behalf of the learned Senior Advocate-Mr. Gopal Sankaranarayanan the Amicus Curiae in the matter.

7. In Youth Bar Association of India (supra) the Supreme Court was examining a petition preferred under Article 32 of the Constitution of India wherein the Youth Bar Association had prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the Union of India and States to upload each and every FIR registered in all the Police Station within the territory of India on the official website of the Police of all States, as early as possible, preferably within 24 hours from the time of registration. The direction passed by the Supreme Court is quoted herein below:- “11. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we think it appropriate to record the requisite conclusions and, thereafter, proceed to issue the directions:

11.1. An accused is entitled to get a copy of the first information report at an earlier stage than as prescribed under Section 207 CrPC.

11.2. An accused who has reasons to suspect that he has been roped in a crimina