New Delhi, Oct. 15 -- The Supreme Court on Wednesday set aside a directive by the Uttar Pradesh Police seeking digital footprints from June onwards of a journalist, who exposed the Ayodhya Ram Temple donation theft, while investigating an alleged road rage case against him registered on August 18. Terming the order issued by the Ghaziabad police to social media intermediary 'X' on August 22 as an "overkill", the court noted from the response filed by Ghaziabad Commissioner of Police that information was sought from 'X' to know the whereabouts of journalist Abhishek Upadhyay who remained untraced following the registration of the FIR. Questioning how past social media activity is relevant for investigating a road rage case, the bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and justice Joymalya Bagchi said, "You were asking the service provider for data from June 1, 2026 till August 22 for a road rage that took place on August 18.that appears to be an overkill." The bench held, "The notice of August 22 issued by the local police to the nodal officer of 'X' is quashed. No confidential personal information of the petitioner can be taken which is prior to August 22." Since the court had already protected Upadhyay from arrest or coercive action in connection with the road rage incident, the bench allowed him to challenge the FIR before the appropriate court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the allegations. However, it directed the police, "Any information collected for the period prior to August 22 shall not be used against the petitioner." Further, it said, "The arrest of the petitioner shall remain stayed until further orders." The court also directed police to release his vehicle involved in the alleged road rage case within two days. Raising a pertinent concern, the bench said, "Something needs to be seen that in the guise of investigation, no roving and fishing enquiry is made into one's personal information." Additional advocate general Sharan Dev Singh Thakur appearing for UP government informed the court that under the IT Intermediary Rules 2021, the police is empowered to seek "any" information and it was in exercise of this power, the police sought information. Senior advocate Pradeep Rai appearing for Upadhyay said the petition raises a larger issue of whether the private, confidential information of a person can be utilised by the police under the garb of an investigation. He said that the alleged road rage case was a "concocted story" to target the petitioner for his investigative stories....