Karnataka High Court Rebukes Police Over Ban on Right-Wing Speakers at Event
The Karnataka High Court has delivered a sharp rebuke to the state police for prohibiting two right-wing activists from addressing a public gathering in Belagavi, emphasizing that previous criminal cases cannot serve as grounds for curtailing fundamental rights. In a significant ruling, the court asserted that police actions must be based on reasoned material rather than arbitrary whims.
Court Condemns Arbitrary Police Action
In an order passed on Tuesday, Justice Lalitha Kanneganti of the Karnataka High Court stated, "The police cannot arbitrarily stop a person from speaking in a public meeting based on their 'whims' and 'fancies'. When the State is curtailing citizens' fundamental rights, it shall be based on reasoning and some material." This directive came after the police had initially rejected a request to allow activists Kumari Harika Manjunath and Mithun Chakravathy Devidas Shet, alias Chakravathy Sulibele, to speak at a three-day Sammelan on sanathana dharma.
The police had cited law and order concerns, noting that a total of eight cases were registered against the proposed speakers—seven against Sulibele and one against Harika. However, the court highlighted that such registrations alone do not justify prohibitions on participation in public events.
Legal Arguments and Constitutional Rights
Senior Advocate Arun Shyam, representing the petitioner, argued that the police order violated the Karnataka Police Act, 1963, which permits regulation of public gatherings but not arbitrary bans. He contended that the action infringed upon principles of natural justice and fundamental rights under Articles 19 and 21 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantee freedom of speech and expression, as well as the right to assemble peacefully.
The court underscored that Article 19(1)(a) provides every citizen the right to freedom of speech and expression, including expressing views in public meetings, while Article 19(1)(b) ensures the right to assemble peacefully. It acknowledged that the state government has the authority to impose reasonable restrictions under the Karnataka Police Act to regulate assemblies, but stressed that these must be applied judiciously.
State's Defense and Court's Ruling
The state's counsel defended the police action, stating that the endeavor was to prevent untoward incidents, as the speakers' previous participations had allegedly led to law and order issues. However, the court noted that the petitioners had pointed out no such incidents occurred during similar past programs, undermining the state's claims.
In its ruling, the bench held, "Just because certain cases are registered against the speakers, that itself cannot be a reason for the police to pass such an order prohibiting them from participating or delivering a speech in the Sammelan." The court allowed the petition, set aside the police order for lacking reasons, and directed the Belagavi police to reconsider the representation from the Hindu Sammelana Samiti in accordance with the law.
Implications for Free Speech and Police Powers
This decision reinforces the balance between maintaining public order and upholding constitutional freedoms. It serves as a reminder that while police have regulatory powers, they must exercise them based on concrete evidence and not mere speculation. The ruling is expected to influence future cases involving restrictions on public speaking and assembly, particularly in contexts where individuals face criminal charges.
The event, organized to commemorate the achievements of eminent national figures, proceeded after the police granted permission following the court's intervention. This case highlights ongoing tensions between state authority and individual rights in India, with the judiciary playing a crucial role in safeguarding democratic principles.
