##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA ON THE 30^th OF JULY, 2026 WRIT PETITION No. 3937 of 2026 SHASHIKANT JATAV ALIAS SHASHIKANT GOYAL ALIAS SHASHI KAPOOR Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Mr. Rahul Bansal - Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. B.K.Tyagi - Govt. Advocate for respondent/State.

Mr. Vijay Kumar Jha - Advocate for the respondent [R-3].

ORDER Present petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been preferred seeking quashment of FIR No.53 of 2025 dated 01.06.2025 registered as P.S. Endori, District Bhind under Sections 308(2), 308(4), 308(6), 308(7), 296, 351(2) and 3(5) of BNS.

2.The impugned FIR forming the subject matter of the present writ petition arises from a complaint by one Kaptan Singh Kushwaha, S/o Sundarpal Kushwaha, Sarpanch of the Sherpur Gram Panchayat, who has alleged that the petitioner, viz., Shashikant Goyal, and another journalist, one Pritam Singh, had approached him 8-9 months prior to the filing of the complaint and threatened to file complaints regarding his work at the panchayat and publish false news against him if he did not pay Rs. 50,000/-. The said complaint forms part of a series of FIRs lodged by the Bhind Police SS1 S 1ii igg g :1nn n 5ein a :dg1 t u 5bt r i ymA e: M eLN :O o 8K/ t 4 EV /N2 e 0Dr 2 iRf 6 iAe dJAIN against journalists who are being persecuted by Dr. Asit Yadav, Superintendent of Police, Bhind, on purported complaints by persons against whom the petitioner and other journalists have conducted investigative journalism and published news reports. The petitioner had published two articles in the Bejod Ratna newspaper on 28.05.2024 and 05.06.2024, whereby the petitioner unearthed and exposed a scam and corruption, inter alia, perpetrated by the Sarpanch of the Sherpur Gram Panchayat. This led to the suspension of officials and the attachment of the panchayat, which ultimately resulted in the filing of the FIR against the present petitioner merely in retaliation.

3. The Petitioner seeks the quashing of the Impugned FIR on the grounds that a prima facie appreciation of the allegations fails to make out any offence under Sections 308(2), 308(4), 308(6), 308(7), 296, 351(2) and 3(5) of BNS. The Petitioner contends that the allegations are so absurd and inherently improbable that no prudent person could reach a just conclusion that there are sufficient grounds for proceeding.

5. The Petitioner had conducted investigative journalism and published news reports inter alias against the Complainant, unearthing a corruption scandal of Rs. 25 lakhs in Sherpur Gram Panchayat, one year prior to the filing of the purported complaint and registration of the FIR which had led to inquiry and suspension of officials, and attachment of the panchayat property. Thus, in this context, it is evident that the complainant, in connivance with Bhind Police, has filed the present complaint as a blow- back and retaliation to the various articles authored by the Petitioner SS1 S 1ii igg g :1nn n 5ein a :dg1 t u 5bt r i ymA e: M eLN :O o 8K/ t 4 EV /N2 e 0Dr 2 iRf 6 iAe dJAIN exposing his corruption. The complaint has been filed by the Complainant with a significant and unexplained delay of more than 8-9 months. The uncontroverted allegations made in the Impugned FIR or in the purported complaint, do not disclose any offence, or make out a case against the Petitioner.

6. Notably, the FIR was lodged without a preliminary inquiry and just one day after the Petitioner had been granted a protection order by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Petitioner maintains that the FIR is attended with mala fides and was maliciously instituted with the ulterior motive of seeking vengeance and spiting the Petitioner due to a personal grudge. Such actions are intended to have a "chilling effect" on the profession of journalism and the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitu