Few editors say it so plainly. Speaking at the RSS Vijayadashami celebration in Nagpur, Dainik Jagran editor-in-chief Sanjay Gupta declared: “The ideology of the Sangh and Jagran is one at the point of loyalty and dedication to Indian Sanatan culture and the nation.”

Gupta was chief guest at the event, which marked the close of the Sangh’s centenary year. The Jagran website posted pictures of the event, showing Gupta in attire too similar to the RSS uniform. 

“Most citizens often wonder what the nation, or its system, provides for them. The perspective should instead be: the nation provides us with everything – so, shouldn’t we also learn to give something back? What are a citizen’s duties toward the nation? Such a mindset is frequently lacking. The Sangh has understood these challenges exceptionally well and is consistently working to address them. The editorial policy of the Dainik Jagran newspaper reflects this same approach.”

Gupta went on to describe this policy: “Dainik Jagran is a theistic, faithful, patriotic newspaper and a carrier of Sanatan Indian values, whose very upbringing is Sanatan Indian. It is a newspaper that has complete faith in destiny and nature; that, with positive thinking, adopting the conduct of capable authority and goodwill, constantly inspires its readers to do the same; whose aim is also to awaken in countrymen the sentiment of what they can do for the country, what they can give to the country.”

Gupta listed Dainik Jagran’s seven social concerns, among them education, the environment, water conservation, women’s empowerment and poverty alleviation.

But much of the speech dwelt on citizens’ duties, discipline and devotion to the nation. Gupta called the Sangh an organisation that understands these challenges. He made another sweeping claim – that after Independence no organisation in the country promoted Sanatan Indian values and explained their importance to people. 

Jagran’s past record shows why all this matters. 

The Kathua case

The most serious instance is the 2018 Kathua rape and murder case.

On April 20, 2018, in the case of the sexual assault and murder of an eight-year-old girl in Kathua, Jammu and Kashmir, Dainik Jagran carried a front-page story headlined: “Girl not raped in Kathua case.” Citing the post-mortem report, it claimed the report made no mention of rape.

This was no slip of the headline writer. In a sensitive case involving a child’s murder, the paper denied sexual violence on the strength of a limited reading of a medical report. The absence of an explicit finding in a post-mortem report is not proof that there was no sexual violence. Several outlets criticised the report, and the Jammu and Kashmir Police had clarified that medical experts had confirmed sexual violence against the girl.

Jagran initially removed the story from its website. Kamlesh Raghuvanshi, then editor of Jagran.com, told Newslaundry it had been taken down for further verification. It returned online after a few days. But if the facts were still to be checked, how did the story reach the front page of several print editions? 

The 2017 exit poll: why did the Election Commission step in?

Another example comes from the 2017 Uttar Pradesh assembly elections. After the first phase of voting, an exit poll appeared on the paper’s website, projecting a lead for the BJP, with the BSP second and the SP-Congress alliance third.

The Election Commission treated this as a violation of the restrictions on publishing exit polls during an election and directed that FIRs be registered in 15 UP districts, citing the relevant provisions of the Representation of the People Act and Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code. Gupta told The Indian Express that the poll had been put on the website not by the newspaper but by the advertising department, and that it had been removed.

The commission’s action is not evidence that the BJP projection was right or wrong. The real issue is compliance with election rules and accountability between an organisation's editorial and commercial arms. 

In April 2025, Samajwadi Party president Akhilesh Yadav asked his supporters to stop reading and buying Dainik Jagran, amid his anger over the paper’s reporting.

Newslaundry has reported on several bizarre pieces published by the paper, including a “surgical strike” fact-checked by the government, love jihad theories, praise for the UP bulldozer model, or ads on farmers with bylines.

Jagran’s scale raises the stakes. In declarations before the stock exchange, the newspaper mentions having over 300 editions and sub-editions and a presence across 13 states. According to its corporate profile, Jagran claims to have 8.3 crore readers and operations in more than 10 languages. The group also includes 39 radio stations.

Should a newspaper’s idea of patriotism be tied to one cultural and political ideology, when scrutinising government policy, the governing party’s claims and the Sangh Parivar's activities is also a duty towards public interest journalism?