Today, On 27th February, Supreme Court of India dismissed an FIR against Ashish Dave, former head of Zee Rajasthan and Zee 24 Ghanta, in an alleged extortion case. The court said, “Even Instagram stories are better than this FIR… Is this James Bond movie?”
The Supreme Court dismissed a First Information Report (FIR) against Ashish Dave, the former head of Zee Rajasthan and Zee 24 Ghanta, related to an alleged extortion case.
A Bench comprised of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta determined that the complaint was ambiguous, lacked specific claims, and did not necessitate a criminal investigation.
The court remarked,
“Even Instagram stories are better than this FIR… Is this a James Bond movie?”
Also Read: Baba Ramdev to Take Down Rooh Afza Videos After High Court Slams ‘Sharbat Jihad’ Remark
The Court expressed strong criticism over how the FIR was filed, stating it was vague and missing essential details.
The Court stated,
“This FIR contains nothing. Simply because the complainant is an influential agency, FIR was registered. What is this FIR? Such FIRs cannot be allowed. If a common citizen went to the police station, he would be thrown out for such allegations. We are shocked in the manner in which the FIR has been registered,”
The Court further scrutinized the police’s involvement, remarking,
“Police is influenced by people like the complainant. What stopped you from writing murder also in the FIR? Police opened red carpets for your client (Zee media). Is this a James Bond movie?”
This case originated from an FIR filed in Jaipur based on a complaint from Zee Media, which alleged that Ashish Dave extorted money from various individuals and organizations by threatening negative news coverage.
The company claimed that, due to these threats, adverse content was aired and disseminated on its channels and online platforms without consent.
Ashish Dave sought to have the FIR quashed at the Rajasthan High Court, but in November 2025, the Jaipur Bench denied relief, asserting that the allegations indicated a cognizable offense that warranted an investigation.
The High Court noted that statements from multiple witnesses suggested that Dave had demanded and accepted money under the threat of negative news coverage, concluding that the allegations could not be dismissed as improbable or biased and required further scrutiny.
The Supreme Court has now set-aside the proceedings, stating that the FIR lacked sufficient material to justify the continuation of the criminal case.