NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday outlined six cardinal principles to protect journalistic freedom guaranteed under Article 19 and said criminal process should not assume a vexatious character by filing of FIRs for the same cause in many states.A bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud and M R Shah delineated the principles while allowing investigation into one FIR at Mumbai against Republic TV chief Arnab Goswami and staying proceedings in similar FIRs lodged by Congress party activists against him in many other states. The bench also stayed proceedings in all FIRs for three weeks to permit Goswami to seek anticipatory bail from a competent court.The bench also said that no investigation in any FIR except the one lodged at Nagpur, which has been ordered to be transferred to Mumbai, or any future FIR be proceeded with. It also directed Mumbai police commissioner to provide security to Goswami, his wife and the TV channel if so requested.After hearing senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi for Goswami and senior advocates Kapil Sibal for Maharashtra, Vivek Tankha for Chhattisgarh and Manish Singhvi for Rajasthan, Justice Chandrachud-led bench said a balancing of six principles were required to ensure fair administration of criminal justice. The six principles delineated by the bench were:* Need to ensure that criminal process does not assume character of a vexatious exercise by institution of multifarious complaints founded on the same cause in multiple States;* Need for the law to protect journalistic freedom within the ambit of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution;* Requirement that recourse be taken to the remedies available to every citizen in accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973;* Ensuring that in order to enable the citizen to pursue legal remedies, a protection of personal liberty against coercive steps be granted for a limited duration in the meantime;* Investigation of an FIR should be allowed to take place in accordance with law without this Court deploying its jurisdiction under Article 32 to obstruct the due process of law; and* Assuaging the apprehension of the petitioner of a threat to his safety and the safety of his business establishment.