Multiple FIRs, UAPA charges keep this Jharkhand journalist in jail

Ramgarh, Jharkhand: “As of now, I cannot predict when — or if — Rupesh will be released. After his arrest, more cases have been charged... There is no justification for keeping a journalist in jail," said Ipsa Shatakshi, whose husband and independent journalist Rupesh Kumar Singh (39) was arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA) in Jharkhand on July 17, 2022, alleging Maoist links. 

Rupesh extensively covered the tribal community and the injustices they faced, focusing on the critical issues of jal, jungle, zameen. His articles appeared on digital media platforms such as Dhanchowk, Media Vigil and The Wire. His arrest raised suspicions of foul play among many free speech advocates and journalists. More so, as he was allegedly targeted with Pegasus spyware, with his phone numbers figuring in the snooping list. 

The final report before his arrest highlighted an industrial plant in Giridih and its environmental pollution. Among the victims was a girl aged eight with a tumour on her face. 

“When Rupesh reported on this girl, a minister responded on Twitter [now X] claiming that the child had been taken to a hospital. Rupesh followed up and discovered that she had not received any help. Undeterred, he reported the truth again. Rupesh was not just a reporter — he was relentless with his follow-ups.”

“Labelling anyone who speaks out — be it a journalist, lawyer or academic — as a Maoist has become an all-too-common strategy to stifle dissent,” she continued.

Case diary

As of now, Rupesh has five cases against him in Bihar and Jharkhand. The first case was registered in Bihar's Gaya in 2019. Rupesh firmly believes that his articles on the alleged killing of a tribal worker, Motilal Baske, were the reason why he was framed in the case. 

He spent six months in jail and eventually got bail in December 2019, as the Bihar Police failed to file a chargesheet within the stipulated six months. A few days later, the police filed an eight-page chargesheet, which contained no details of evidence. The case has not been opened since then. "Charges have not been framed yet in the case," Rupesh’s lawyer, Shyam Kumar Sinha, told 101Reporters. 

Rupesh's second arrest occurred in 2022 at Ramgarh village in Jharkhand's Saraikela Kharsawan district. Kandra Police, under whose limits Ramgarh falls, charged him with recruiting people and arranging funds for CPI-Maoist activities in the region. There was no fresh First Information Report (FIR) against him, and his case was clubbed with the FIR registered on November 13, 2021, in connection with the arrest of seven CPI-Maoist activists. The chargesheet included Sections 10 and 13 of the UAPA, Section 17 of the Indian Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1908, and Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

"His name did not even appear in that FIR," Advocate Sinha said.

Later, three additional cases were filed — all of which were dated before his arrest in the Saraikela case. Prominent among them was the Rohtas case, being handled by the National Investigation Agency. The FIR registered on April 26, 2022, included Rupesh's name and involved Sections 10, 13, 16, 18, 19, 20 and 38 of the UAPA and Sections 124, 121(A), 122A, 120 (B) and 34 of the IPC. 

The other two unnamed FIRs were from Chaibasa (dated November 16, 2018) and Bokaro (June 30, 2022).   

In the Chaibasa case, the district sessions court first rejected the bail application, but the bail was approved upon approaching the additional sessions court. However, in the Bokaro case, they had to approach the Ranchi High Court for bail as the sessions court and the additional sessions court denied the bail application. 

Highlighting that it is near impossible to secure bail in UAPA cases as the courts operate on the presumption of guilt, Advocate Sinha said, “By charging multiple cases, the authorities create an impression that the accused has a criminal history, effectively stalling any chance of release... So far, Rupesh has been granted bail in the Bokaro and Chaibasa cases, while Ranchi High Court rejected his bail in the Saraikela case on December 6, 2023."

On January 27, 2025, the Supreme Court denied Rupesh's bail in the Saraikela case. "Our lawyers told me that the reason for denial was the presence of too many cases, all with serious allegations," Shatakshi said.

Asked if Rupesh is hopeful of a fair trial, Advocate Sinha said, “Lower courts often mirror the higher courts. If the higher courts display a lack of sympathy toward journalists charged with sedition or similar offences, the lower courts follow suit, applying equally harsh judgments. Occasionally, courageous judges may recognise the gravity of such cases, but they too are bound by precedent. Even in states where tribal communities have endured extensive marginalisation, finding a judiciary sympathetic to activists and journalists remains rare.”

Lodged in a faraway jail 

For over a year now, Rupesh has been lodged in Bhagalpur's Shahid Jubba Sahni Central Jail. Prior to this, he was in Patna's Adarsh Central Jail, Beur. 

“On January 23, 2024, under fabricated allegations of intimidating people within the jail as well as others outside the jail, he was administratively transferred to Bhagalpur for six months… Recently, it came to light that the authorities have once again extended his transfer period under false pretexts, without filing any paperwork in court or notifying the judiciary. This decision does not make sense to us,” Shatakshi said.

“His case is being tried in Patna’s civil court. Keeping him at Bhagalpur seems baseless… He would often speak out against the corruption in Patna jail, and I think that was why he was transferred,” she added.  

The Bhagalpur jail is 350 km from Ramgarh, where Shatakshi currently lives. “I can communicate with him only through video conferencing or by prison visit. With both methods, there has to be a gap of eight days,” she said.

“Our lawyers communicate with Rupesh only during court proceedings when he is present. They do not really want to visit the jail premises,” she added.

The last time Shatakshi visited Rupesh in jail was on September 3, 2024, on his birthday. Even then, it is very difficult to communicate as the telephone receivers rarely work properly. There is a seven-foot separation, and one can only talk using receivers. Even with them, one can barely understand what is being said. “Jail visits are very difficult, firstly due to the distance and secondly, because I have a seven-year-old who needs me.”

Shatakshi could meet Rupesh in person on November 29, when the Patna High Court ordered the police to physically present him. “That was the last time our son could interact physically with his father after two years.”

The family is facing financial hurdles as Rupesh was the sole breadwinner. Shatakshi confirmed that Rupesh’s transfer to a distant jail, coupled with the mounting legal expenses, has made the journey even more arduous. 

“Some kind-hearted lawyer friends are working for reduced or no fees, yet the sheer number of cases demands more resources. The trial court proceedings are one thing, and bail hearings follow an entirely separate course, often traversing multiple courts. From obtaining certified copies of legal documents to paying fees for the lawyers and covering travel costs for meetings with them requires continuous financial juggling. Visiting Rupesh itself is a strain, as he has been placed approximately 350 km away from our current residence, making each visit an expensive affair,” she said. 

“Following his transfer to Bhagalpur, he was kept in a room with almost no lighting. He was pursuing his MA in History at the time and needed to study, but was denied reading material as well as pen and paper. He was also denied a hot water bottle during the chilling temperatures of January,” Shatakshi alleged. Rupesh had even threatened to launch a hunger strike in protest. 

She said they complained to the jail authorities as well as the chief minister about this. The situation improved only after they moved the NIA Special Court in Patna.

A pressing issue

Advocate Sinha felt that the focus should be on press freedom as a whole. “Even the mere filing of an FIR can create immense mental pressure on journalists. Once an FIR is registered, they are compelled to navigate the courts, often just to apply for bail. This tactic effectively disrupts their work and silences critical voices.”

“There is an undeniable and deliberate attempt to suppress dissent, silence the media, and stifle press freedom. The focus must shift to safeguarding these voices and ensuring that the media, as the fourth pillar of democracy, is not silenced,” he said.

Many have documented the suppression of press freedom in India. Geeta Seshu, the founder of Free Speech Collective, has been tracking media trends since 2010. “Back then, there were frequent cases of journalists being killed, attacked or threatened on the job. While the number of such physical attacks may seem to have reduced — no longer reaching double digits — the impunity remains. Justice for these crimes is almost non-existent,” she said.

“What we are witnessing now is lawfare, where the law is weaponised against press freedom, citizens’ freedom and journalists' right to report without fear or intimidation. This is happening systematically, across the board,” she added.

Citing that the government's approach has shifted over time, she said they have introduced a slew of laws and regulations that actively work against journalists. “For instance, we now see journalists being arrested under UAPA, something unheard of a decade ago. Back then, perhaps one or two cases existed. Today, at least 16 journalists face charges under UAPA. While a few have been released from jails, many remain behind bars.”

“The UAPA is a draconian law, originally designed to combat terrorism, but now being wielded against journalists, academics, human rights activists and Adivasi workers. Bail is nearly impossible under this law. Additionally, various states have their public security acts, enabling preventive detention,” she detailed.

A report published by the People’s Union of Civil Liberties, detailing the abuse of UAPA in India between 2009 and 2022, shows that only about a quarter of those arrested under the law got bail, and less than 3% were convicted. “The indisputable fact today is that thousands of persons arrested under UAPA are languishing in jail without bail, before eventually getting acquitted. The legal, moral and democratic question before us is whether such a law as the UAPA be permitted to exist in our law books. An equally important question that has to be addressed is about the accountability of police officials who wilfully bend and break the law and the need to prosecute them for abuse of the law,” the report said. 

Seshu strongly advocated the abolishment of UAPA in its current form, as it has been hopelessly distorted and serves no purpose in a democracy. “This is similar to the misuse of sedition laws, a colonial relic that has been wielded absurdly. The Supreme Court eventually stayed it, but the government responded by embedding similar provisions into the new criminal laws. Also, the vagueness in these criminal laws is deliberate, allowing the law to be applied arbitrarily.”

(Sagnik Majumder is a freelance journalist and a member of 101Reporters.) 

This story has been produced by 101Reporters, an independent news agency with a network of 3,000+ freelance journalists across the country, in collaboration with Crime & Punishment, Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy.