MP High Court Refuses To Quash Extortion FIR Against Journalist, Notes Alleged 'Systematic Extortion By Local Media Elements'
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has refused to quash an FIR registered against a journalist accused of extortion and criminal intimidation, observing that the respondents had placed material on record pointing towards a "broader pattern of alleged systematic extortion by certain local media elements" and that the allegations in the FIR prima facie disclosed commission of a cognizable offence....
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has refused to quash an FIR registered against a journalist accused of extortion and criminal intimidation, observing that the respondents had placed material on record pointing towards a "broader pattern of alleged systematic extortion by certain local media elements" and that the allegations in the FIR prima facie disclosed commission of a cognizable offence. [2026 LiveLaw (MP) 318]
Interestingly, the High Court in May 2026 dismissed another petition by the same journalist seeking to quash the FIR concerning extortion allegations levelled by a private allopathy doctor.
The bench of Justice Rajesh Kumar Gupta refused to quash the FIR against him stating,
"The core allegations in FIR No. 53/2025 disclose specific imputations regarding extortion and threats made to a local public functionary. While the petitioner contends that these proceedings are a retaliatory blow-back for investigative journalism unearthing irregularities in the Sherpur Gram Panchayat, the respondents have brought on record material pointing toward a broader pattern of alleged systematic extortion by certain local media elements within the district, as corroborated by the 'Special Information' notice issued by the Inspector General of Police, Chambal Zone".
The petition was filed by a journalist seeking quashing of an FIR registered for extortion (Section 308), obscenity (Section 296) and criminal intimidation (Section 351) of BNS. Per the FIR, the Sarpanch of Sherpur Gram Panchayat filed a complaint alleging that the petitioner, along with another journalist, approached him 8-9 months ago and threatened to publish false news against him unless he paid ₹50,000.
It was argued by the petitioner that he had published two articles in Bejod Ratna Newspaper contending that the Sarpanch is corrupt and is conducting a scam. This led to the suspension of officials and attachment of the panchayat, which led to the filing of this FIR against the petitioner.
The petitioner sought quashment on the ground that prima facie evidence fails to make out any case. The petitioner claimed that he has conducted investigative journalism and published reports unearthing a corruption scandal of ₹25 Lakh, which resulted in the registration of this present FIR.
The petitioner also argued that he, along with several other journalists, was "invited" to the office of SP Asit Yadav on the pretext of tea, where they were allegedly physically assaulted, battered, and intimidated by the SP and numerous subordinates. Interestingly, the petitioner had submitted the same arguments in his aforementioned petition, which was dismissed by the High Court.
The petitioner claimed to have held a press conference with another journalist after the assault at the SP's office, and filed a complaint on the CM helpline and obtained a medical examination report which confirmed trauma and abrasions. Press clubs of MP and Indore demanded action against responsible police officers of Bhind.
The petitioner further submitted that the SP had issued a pubic advisory on his official Facebook page labelling the journalist and YouTubers as "extortionists". Thereafter, on the intervening night of May 4-5, the petitioner and another journalist were intercepted under the guise of travelling to Delhi, taken to the SP's bungalow and threatened with false prosecutions and forced to record a coerced video claiming the matter was resolved, which the police circulated online.
The counsel for the Respondents argued that the petitioner is not a victim but an "opportunist" who is misusing his position to extort and blackmail people.
The court noted that the core allegations in the FIR were regarding threatening and extortion made to local public functionaries. Therefore, looking at the material on record, the bench held that it prima facie discloses commission of a cognizable offence. It held,
"defense of mala fides, institutional friction, or prior journalistic exposés are matters of evidentiary value that require proper testing during trial and cannot serve as grounds for a summary termination of criminal proceedings."
Accordingly, the court dismissed the petition.
Case Title: Shashikant Jatav v State of Madhya Pradesh WP-3937-2026
For Petitioner: Advocate Rahul Bansal
For State: Government Advocate BK Tyagi
For SP: Advocate Vijay Kumar Jha