The Madhya Pradesh High Court has quashed a criminal case registered against a journalist for reporting a violent incident during a Ganesh Visarjan procession in Silwani, Raisen district. The Court observed that merely reporting an incident involving violence does not amount to promoting communal enmity under Section 196(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
Justice Himanshu Joshi held that the allegations must disclose specific material showing an attempt to promote hatred or enmity between communities before criminal proceedings can continue.
Background
The petition was filed by Uvesh Khan @ Uvesh Reporter under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), seeking quashing of an FIR registered on September 8, 2025, at Silwani Police Station, Raisen.
According to the prosecution, the journalist had published a YouTube news report about an incident during the Ganesh Visarjan procession on September 6, 2025. The complaint alleged that the reporting created fear and confusion among members of the Hindu community and had the potential to provoke communal tension.
The journalist argued that his report merely covered an actual violent incident in which two people sustained injuries. He also referred to another FIR registered in connection with an alleged assault during the same procession.
The Court explained that Section 196(1) of the BNS requires material indicating the promotion or attempted promotion of disharmony or enmity between different communities. Referring to the Supreme Court's decision in Patricia Mukhim v. State of Meghalaya, the Court reiterated that mens rea, meaning the intention behind an act, is an essential ingredient of the offence.
The Court observed:
"The mere reporting of an incident involving violence does not, by itself, constitute the offence. The nature and content of the publication, the context in which it was made, and the requisite connection with the promotion or attempted promotion of enmity between groups are material considerations."
It further noted that the FIR did not identify any specific words or expressions in the journalist's report that promoted communal enmity.
The Court also clarified that being a journalist does not provide immunity from prosecution, but freedom of speech and expression cannot be restricted merely because a report concerns a sensitive public incident.
Finding that the allegations did not establish a prima facie case under Section 196(1) of the BNS, the High Court allowed the petition and quashed the FIR registered as Crime No. 328/2025, along with all consequential proceedings against the journalist.
