The Supreme Court today heard the plea of two journalists from Bhind, Madhya Pradesh, who have alleged that they were brutally assaulted in police custody for reporting on illegal sand mining in the Chambal riverbed region.

A Bench of Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Manmohan observed, “Considering the nature of the allegation, we are not inclined to entertain this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India,” while asking the Petitioners to approach the jurisdictional High Court within two weeks.

The Court clarified that the Petitioners shall not be arrested in the meantime and left it open for the concerned High Court to consider any plea for interim relief.

The counsel appearing for the journalists submitted, "They have put completely false facts. I would like some time to put certain documents on record in my rejoinder, which completely takes down their story...". They further submitted that the journalists fear for their lives and pressed for interim protection. The Bench indicated that their apprehension could be addressed by moving to the appropriate High Court.

Despite the Court's initial disinclination to entertain the Article 32 petition, it ultimately granted two weeks’ protection from arrest, stating, “Petitioners shall not be arrested.”

Background

Two journalists from Madhya Pradesh approached the Supreme Court alleging brutal custodial assault by the police in retaliation for their reporting on illegal sand mining in the region. According to their petition, they were summoned to the office of Bhind Superintendent of Police on May 1, 2025, under the pretext of having tea, only to be detained and allegedly stripped and beaten along with other journalists. One of the Petitioners, who belongs to a Scheduled Caste, also claimed he was subjected to caste-based slurs and physical violence. The journalists contended that their coverage of rampant sand mining activities in the Chambal riverbed, allegedly protected by local authorities, made them targets of this police-led reprisal.

The Supreme Court, while issuing notice to the Madhya Pradesh Government, sought its response but declined to grant immediate protection from arrest. A Bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma questioned why the petitioners had not approached the Madhya Pradesh High Court first, and also noted that the Bhind SP was not named as a respondent.
The Petitioners have maintained that their safety concerns prevented them from seeking local remedy, and that they have been facing continuous threats, false FIRs, and harassment since the incident.

Cause Title: Shashikant Jatav @ Shashikant Goyal @ Shashi Kapoor & Anr. v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. W.P.(Crl.) No. 237/2025