Observing that an accused person is entitled to a fair trial regardless of the seriousness of the allegations, the Patna High Court has restrained media platforms from portraying businessman Rishu Shree as guilty while criminal proceedings are still pending. Justice Ansul made it clear that responsible reporting is protected, but public declarations of guilt before trial undermine the justice system.
Background of the Case
The case arose from a petition filed by Rishu Shree, who sought quashing of criminal proceedings registered by the Special Vigilance Unit (SVU) in connection with SVU Case No. 05 of 2025, lodged on April 30, 2025.
During the hearing, senior counsel for the petitioner argued that although a raid was conducted more than a year after the FIR was registered, no incriminating material was allegedly recovered. Despite this, the petitioner claimed that television channels, newspapers, online portals and social media platforms carried extensive reports portraying him as guilty even before the commencement of trial.
The court also directed the petitioner to implead the Enforcement Directorate (ED) as a party in the proceedings after its counsel pointed out that the agency had not been made a respondent despite being connected with the same FIR.
Court's Observations
Justice Ansul examined several news reports placed before the court and noted that many publications had described the petitioner using language suggesting criminal responsibility before any judicial determination.
The bench observed,
"Maligning the image of a person who is yet to be held guilty may come within the ambit of defamatory act, immoral act or even an indecent act. This is pre-judging the issue when the matter is sub-judice."
Referring to Supreme Court precedents on media reporting, the court reiterated that while freedom of the press is a constitutional right, it is subject to reasonable restrictions. It emphasized that "trial by media" is inconsistent with the principle of a fair trial and can influence public opinion as well as potential witnesses.
At the same time, the court clarified that it was not imposing a media gag. Instead, it sought to prevent irresponsible reporting that attributes guilt before judicial findings.
As the bench observed,
"The court is clearly not in a view of media gag over the issue. However, the court would certainly direct for control over irresponsible reporting and imputation of guilt upon the petitioner without any initiation of trial at all."
Pending further consideration of the petition, the High Court permitted print, electronic, digital and social media platforms to report factual developments relating to the case and court proceedings.
However, it directed that media outlets must not:
1. Describe the petitioner as guilty.
2. Portray him as having committed the alleged offences.
3. Publish material determining criminal liability.
4. Use expressions such as "mastermind", "scamster", "kingpin" or similar terms implying guilt.
5. Conduct media trials based on alleged confessions, investigation material or unproved documents.
The restraint applies equally to digital publications, online portals, podcasts, video streaming platforms and social media accounts.
Decision
The Patna High Court directed the Enforcement Directorate and the Special Vigilance Unit to file their counter affidavits, including an explanation for the delay of about one year in conducting the raid after registration of the FIR.
The matter has been listed for further hearing on July 10, 2026, while the interim directions regulating media reporting will continue in the meantime.
Case Details
Case Title: Rishu Shree v. State of Bihar
Case Number: Criminal Miscellaneous No. 32409 of 2026
Judge: Justice Ansul
Decision Date: 24 June 2026
