The Madhya Pradesh High Court, on June 19, 2025, dismissed a writ petition filed by Maruf Ahmad Khan, which sought legal intervention against allegedly misleading news reports aimed at the Muslim community and Islam. Justice Vishal Mishra presided over the matter and ruled that the relief sought was essentially in the nature of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), making the plea non-maintainable under a writ of mandamus.

The petitioner, Maruf Ahmad Khan, had urged the court to direct criminal action against the editors of two Hindi newspapers. He accused them of misusing terms like “Love Jihad” to intentionally distort meanings and incite communal tensions, particularly against Muslims. Additionally, he demanded that strict guidelines be issued to prevent the publication and broadcast of false or defamatory news related to the Muslim community.

Read Also:- MP High Court Seeks State Response on Liquor Overpricing Allegations

“The petitioner has no locus standi to file this petition,” the State's counsel argued, highlighting a fundamental procedural issue.

In response, the petitioner contended that he was directly affected, being a member of the Muslim community. He claimed that his religious sentiments and those of others had been hurt by such publications. He also submitted that a police complaint had been lodged on April 30, 2025, but no follow-up action was taken, prompting the need for judicial intervention.

Read Also:- MP High Court Grants Bail to Lecturer Accused of Circulating Sensitive WhatsApp Content

Justice Mishra, however, noted that the complaint and the nature of the relief clearly resembled a Public Interest Litigation, not a personal grievance. He emphasized that under Article 226 of the Constitution, a writ of mandamus cannot be granted for PIL-like matters.

“The relief claimed is in the nature of a Public Interest Litigation for which mandamus cannot be issued,” the court remarked.

The court also clarified that an alternative remedy was available to the petitioner. He could approach higher police authorities or seek recourse through the appropriate Magistrate under legal provisions.

Read Also:- Youth’s Death Sentence Commuted: MP Court Cites Lack of ‘Brutality’ in Child Rape Case

“The petitioner being a complainant is having an alternative and efficacious remedy of approaching the concerning Magistrate by filing an application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C./Section 175 of BNSS or by filing a private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C./Section 223 of BNSS,” stated the bench.

Referring to precedents laid down by the Supreme Court in Sakri Basu v. State of U.P., Sudhir Bhaskar Rao Tambe v. Hemant Yashwant Dhage, and others, the Court reiterated that such grievances should first be routed through appropriate forums before invoking constitutional remedies.

With these observations, the Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed the petition.

Case Title: Maruf Ahmad Khan v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Others