Ram Temple Donation Row: SC to Hear Journalist Abhishek Upadhyay’s Plea Today

The Supreme Court will hear journalist Abhishek Upadhyay’s plea challenging a Ghaziabad FIR arising from an alleged road-rage incident, with the journalist claiming the case was fabricated to intimidate him over his reporting on alleged irregularities in donations at the Ayodhya Ram Temple and corruption in Uttar Pradesh. The development comes as the same three-judge bench is separately supervising an investigation into the alleged Ram Temple donation irregularities, bringing questions of investigative independence and journalistic freedom into parallel proceedings before the apex court.

Upadhyay’s plea was mentioned on August 24 before a bench headed by CJI Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana. The Court agreed to list it for August 25, subject to defects in the petition being cured. His case is at its first substantive stage and should not be confused with the separate Ram Temple donation PILs, which have already undergone several hearings.

The challenged FIR No. 678/2026, registered at Indirapuram police station on August 18, concerns an alleged road-rage incident near Shipra Mall. Upadhyay disputes the allegations and claims the complaint contains inconsistencies, including a discrepancy over the motorcycle involved. He alleges that the registration number cited corresponds to a different motorcycle and person. He has also alleged that police pressured nearby shopkeepers to delete or withhold CCTV footage. These claims remain allegations.

Upadhyay further claims that around 12 police personnel visited his residence at about 10:30 pm on August 20, when he was away, strengthening his apprehension of arrest and physical harm. He has approached the Supreme Court under Article 32, seeking quashing of the FIR or, alternatively, an investigation by an agency outside the Uttar Pradesh Police, including the Delhi Police or CBI. He has also offered to cooperate with the investigation.

The plea comes against the backdrop of a separate Supreme Court-monitored controversy over alleged irregularities in Ram Temple donations. An initial UP government SIT, constituted in June, submitted its report, while a separate SIT established under the Supreme Court’s directions is continuing its investigation. At least three major petitions have sought an independent probe, forensic audit and greater transparency in temple finances.

Since July, the Supreme Court has sought status reports, strengthened the investigative mechanism and directed inclusion of a forensic auditor. On August 17, the Court ordered the SIT to expedite the probe and submit a sealed-cover status report, stressing the need to take the investigation to its logical conclusion. The Court has so far stopped short of ordering a CBI probe.

The chronology has added significance. Upadhyay reported on the donation allegations in June; the related Ayodhya FIR followed on June 25; the Supreme Court intensified scrutiny in July and August; the Ghaziabad FIR was registered on August 18; and Upadhyay approached the apex court on August 24. He argues the sequence reflects retaliation for his journalism, a claim yet to be judicially established.

The August 25 hearing could determine whether the Court grants interim protection, seeks the Uttar Pradesh government’s response, examines the disputed evidence or considers an independent investigation. Meanwhile, the donation probe remains under judicial supervision. The outcome could turn the matter into a wider examination of press freedom, alleged retaliatory prosecution and investigative independence, although neither the donation allegations nor Upadhyay’s claims against the Ghaziabad FIR have received a final judicial determination.