The Supreme Court has barred the UP police from taking enforcement action against a journalist who flagged the Ram Temple embezzlements

Abhishek Upadhyay. Photo credit:

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (August 25, 2026) directed the Uttar Pradesh police to refrain from taking any enforcement action against Abhishek Upadhyay, a freelance journalist who flagged the alleged misuse of donations to Ayodhya’s Ram Temple in an FIR in a road rage case.

The journalist told the SC that the UP police is looking for a digital trail to dig up the sources of his Ram Temple donation case

Appearing before a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, senior advocate Pradeep Rai appeared for Mr Upadhyay and said his client had committed the “unforgivable sin of exposing the Ram Mandir donation issue”.

“I don’t want any relief other than a fair investigation,” Mr. Rai said.

The senior advocate, who is also the newly elected president of the Supreme Court Bar, said the police did not even hand over a copy of the FIR and CCTV footage to the journalist to help him defend himself in court.

The court directed the Commissioner of Police, Ghaziabad, to provide copies of the FIR and CCTV footage to Mr. Upadhyay and submit a compliance report to the Supreme Court at the next hearing on September 7.

The court said the interim protection against police action would extend to any further FIR filed in the interim period against Mr Upadhyay to give him “breathing space and time”.

“For now, we can protect you. In the meantime, he can approach the appropriate high court. We appreciate that you have immediate concerns about repeated FIRs against you,” Chief Justice Kant said.

The court said the allegation against Mr. Upadhyay was that his SUV rammed into a two-wheeler after which he shouted abuse at the caste scooter.

“If it happened, it would amount to an offence. If it is a fabricated story, you need space and time to solve the case,” Chief Justice Kant said.

In an oral statement on August 24, Mr Upadhyay’s counsel said his client had been charged by the police with other serious offences, including under the Scheduled Caste Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Mr. Upadhyay alleged that the FIR was based on fabricated allegations against him and was an attempt to harass him for his independent journalistic work.

In the plea, he claimed that he was not supplied with a copy of the FIR and that the police were forcing nearby shopkeepers to delete the CCTV footage of the relevant time.

Published – 25 Aug 2026 12:57 IST