In this regard, under-display of a news-item pertaining to police high-handedness in Bhajanpura village in Forbesganj in Araria district, in which a police Jawan was seen to be trampling a common man there under his boot, is an example of prevalence of such an undeclared self-censorship in print media in Bihar, though this incident was telecasted across the country. The issue of under display of this news was brought into the notice of the fact finding team firstly by Bihar Media Watch which had sent a letter to the Chairman of the Press Council of India immediately after the incident. A cross-section of the readers and social activists in course of fact finding team’s visit to Bihar further confirmed it.

Bihar Media Watch was the first to complain the Press Council of India that Forbesganj firing incident was not carried by papers like Hindustan, Dainik Jagran and Prabhat Khabar. Even the visit of the National Commission for Minorities chairman Justice Wajahat Habibullah to Bhajanpura firing site was not covered. However, Hindustan Hindi daily through one of its column ran a campaign against it colouring the visit of Minorities Commission chairman to Forbesganj village on communal lines.

In its complaint, referring the Forbisganj firing of June 3, 2011 as an example, Bihar Media Watch said that the three newspapers being published from Patna - Hindustan, Dainik Jagaran and Prabhat Khabar – avoided even publishing simple information about the incident.

Media Watch said that Hindustan refused to even acknowledge the visit of the Chairman of the Minority Commission, Wajahat Habibullah, to Forbisganj on June 21, 2011, as news. On the other hand, the newspaper published a column 'Do Tuk' on the front page on June 24, 2011 in which it performed the role of supporting the ruling establishment. It may be mentioned here that four persons belonging to Muslim community were shot dead by Bihar Police personnel on June 1, 2011 after a roadblock. The injured were trample upon by boot wearing police. Video clippings of the incidents were published on social media sites. Some national channels also dared to show these footage. However, the local newspapers published this incident of police atrocity in deep inside the pages (like pages 12-13) is such a manner as if it was not an incident worth attention. No follow up news was published. In this 'well governed' stat, the news regarding this incident was tried to be suppressed on behest of the government. According to Media Watch, Hindustan was not in a position to take any risk because maximum number of advertisements is being given to this newspaper. Though the newspaper editors took an alibi that it was not deliberate, as they had covered the incident but did not found it to be fit to highlight it in a big way. On the contrary, social activists complained that such an incident of blatant violation of human rights and human dignity demanded a proper display of such news.

During the hearing those who appeared before the fact finding team, had a common complaint that newspapers in Bihar totally ignore people’s issues like hunger, starvation deaths, peoples’ movements, non-implementation or tardy implementation of poverty alleviation schemes, corruption eating out into poverty alleviation schemes, police atrocities, police high-handedness, under-development and state government apathy to people’s plight as well as other such issues which deserve proper coverage in newspapers in public interest. RJD leaders expressed their concern over the fact that their agitations and statements go quite unreported or are under-reported.

They all had a common refrain that state government press releases, statement of ministers, bureaucrats are given undue display whereas the statements and news of opposition is largely ignored. The fact finding team also found that a large number of common people who are generally newspaper readers, share the same feelings as was expressed by the trade union activists, social activists and the opposition leaders.