On June 26, 2026, a Single Judge Bench of Justice Ansul at the Patna High Court passed a significant media gag order restraining all print, electronic, digital, and social media platforms from portraying Bihar contractor Rishu Shree as guilty in connection with the alleged tender scam being investigated by the Special Vigilance Unit (SVU).
The court made clear that while factual reporting of case developments would remain permissible, imputing criminal liability upon the accused before commencement of trial would undermine his right to a fair trial, according to LiveLaw.
Background & Case History
The case originates from SVU FIR No. 05 of 2025, registered in 2025 against Rishu Ranjan Sinha alias Rishu Shree and others. Shree is a Bihar-based contractor whose firm, Reliable Infra Services, is accused of manipulating government tenders by allegedly bribing officials, including senior IAS officer Sanjeev Hans, as reported by FreePressJournal.
The present petition before the court is Criminal Miscellaneous No. 32409 of 2026, filed by Rishu Shree seeking quashing of criminal proceedings arising out of SVU Case No. 05 of 2025. Justice Ansul’s Single Judge Bench is presiding over these proceedings.
This is not Shree’s first approach to the Patna High Court. An earlier criminal writ petition filed by him — Rishu Shree vs. Union of India — was dismissed on May 18, 2026, by Justice Arun Kumar Jha in a 75-page judgment, which found the petition completely devoid of merit, per BiharWatch.
- April 30, 2025: SVU registers FIR No. 05 of 2025 against Rishu Shree and others under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
- May 18, 2026: Justice Arun Kumar Jha dismisses Rishu Shree’s earlier criminal writ petition in a detailed 75-page judgment.
- May 27, 2026: SVU conducts a raid at Rishu Shree’s residence; he is subsequently arrested, according to LiveLaw.
- June 26, 2026: Justice Ansul passes the interim media restraint order in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 32409 of 2026.
Arguments & Submissions
The petitioner submitted before Justice Ansul that although the FIR had been registered in 2025, a raid was conducted at his residence only on May 27, 2026, following which he was arrested. The petition sought quashing of the criminal proceedings in their entirety, according to LiveLaw.
Rishu Shree’s counsel cited the Supreme Court’s precedent in State of Maharashtra v. Rajendra Jawanmal Gandhi, arguing that trial by press or electronic media is antithetical to the rule of law and that convicting an accused in the court of public opinion before any judicial determination was constitutionally impermissible.
The petitioner also highlighted that social media platforms had been flooded with content declaring him guilty — with terms such as ‘mastermind’ and ‘kingpin’ being widely used — despite the fact that trial had not even commenced, as reported by TV9 Hindi.
The Ruling: Key Findings
Justice Ansul declined to impose a blanket media gag but passed a calibrated interim order directing that irresponsible reporting imputing guilt upon the petitioner be curbed immediately, according to LiveLaw.
The bench observed: “Having seen both sides of the coin, this court is clearly not in a view of media gag over the issue.” However, the court was equally emphatic that fair trial rights could not be sacrificed on the altar of media coverage.
The court held: “The petitioner may be accused of a serious case, his rights to get a fair trial would not be ousted by the magnitude of the allegation.” It further noted that “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.”
In its operative directions, the court restrained all print, electronic, digital, and social media platforms — including online portals, video streaming services, podcasts, social media accounts, channels, and other internet-based platforms — from describing Rishu Shree as guilty, portraying him as having committed the alleged offences, or publishing material purporting to determine his criminal liability.
Crucially, media outlets were specifically directed to avoid using terms like ‘mastermind’ and ‘kingpin’ for Rishu Shree, as reported by TV9 Hindi.
Legal Analysis & Implications
The case engages multiple statutory frameworks. The SVU’s investigation is rooted in the Prevention of Corruption Act, while the Enforcement Directorate has initiated separate money laundering proceedings against Shree under Sections 17, 50, and 66(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), per BiharWatch.
The court also referred to the Government of India’s media policy advisory for police authorities, which emphasises that information shared with the media should not hamper investigations or affect the legal rights of accused persons and victims, according to LiveLaw.
The reliance on State of Maharashtra v. Rajendra Jawanmal Gandhi signals the court’s alignment with established Supreme Court doctrine that trial by media — whether print or digital — constitutes a direct threat to the constitutional guarantee of a fair trial under Article 21.
The order’s explicit extension to podcasts, streaming services, and social media accounts reflects the judiciary’s evolving recognition that the media landscape has transformed dramatically, and that older restraint frameworks designed for print and television are no longer sufficient.
Reactions & Stakeholder Response
No formal statements from Bar associations or civil society organisations have been reported in the pre-verified sources at the time of publication. The SVU and the State of Bihar, as respondents in the petition, are expected to file their replies ahead of the next date of hearing.
A chargesheet has already been filed by the SVU in the Special Vigilance Court against Rishu Shree, IAS officer Sanjeev Hans, and five others in connection with the tender scam, according to PatnaPress, underscoring that the investigation is at an advanced stage even as the High Court proceedings continue.
What’s Next
The Patna High Court has listed Criminal Miscellaneous No. 32409 of 2026 for further hearing on July 10, 2026, according to LiveLaw. The court is expected to hear substantive arguments on the quashing petition at that stage.
The ED’s parallel PMLA proceedings remain active. With a chargesheet already filed in the Special Vigilance Court and ED investigations ongoing, the legal proceedings surrounding the Bihar tender scam are expected to intensify in the weeks ahead.
More legal news at The Courtroom.
Disclaimer
Disclaimer: This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws may change or vary by case — consult a qualified lawyer before acting. The Courtroom is not liable for any reliance on this content.
