The body of 36-year-old journalist Rajeev Pratap, who operated the YouTube news channel Delhi Uttarakhand Live and frequently reported on corruption and irregularities (including at a local hospital and school), was recovered from a river in Uttarakhand. His car had been found nine days earlier near the Bhagirathi river, with his body later discovered downstream at the Joshiyara hydroelectric barrage.

While police initially suggested a car accident, the journalist’s family suspects foul play. Pratap’s wife, Muskan, stated that he had been receiving death threats from people demanding he take down his investigative videos, saying he felt “anxious” and believed he had been “abducted.” The incident follows a pattern of violence against journalists in India who report on politically sensitive topics, such as the deaths of Mukesh Chandrakar, Shashikant Warishe, and Subhash Kumar Mahto. Several media bodies, including the Press Club of India and the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), have demanded a thorough and transparent inquiry into the death, urging authorities not to dismiss the family’s allegations of targeting due to his journalism.

In cases where investigative journalists known for exposing corruption are found dead under circumstances that police initially label as accidents, what specific, independent judicial or regulatory mechanisms should be automatically triggered to ensure that threats made against the journalist’s life are rigorously investigated as the primary cause?

#RajeevPratap #JournalistKilled #PressFreedom #India #CorruptionReporting #JusticeForRajeevPratap #Uttarakhand