- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22001 WP No. 51480 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI WRIT PETITION NO. 51480 OF 2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SHANTARAM HEGDEKATTE AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS S/O LATE VENKATARAMANA HEGDEKATTE NO.E7, 3RD FLOOR, OAKYARD APARTMENTS, 38TH CROSS, EAST END C MAIN ROAD, THILAK NAGAR, JAYANAGARA, BENGALURU-560001. 2. SHANKARA BHAT AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS S/O NARAYANA BHAT R/A SKANDA RESIDENY, SHIVA NAGARA, TENKILA, NEAR BYPASS ROAD, PUTTUR-574201, DK DISTRICT 3. MAYURI GAJANANA UPADHYAYA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS W/O GAJANANA SUBRAMANYA UPADHYAYA, R/O NO.19, 12TH COSS, VIJAYANAGARA, PILELINE ROAD, NEAR TEJA HOME BENGALURU-560040. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. AJOY KUMAR PATIL, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22001 WP No. 51480 of 2019 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME AND TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, VIDHANA VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE IN KARNATAKA NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560002 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE BENGALURU CITY, BHAGWAN MAHAVEER JAIN ROAD, BENGALURU-560001. 4. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE GIRINAGAR POLICE STATION, BENGALURU-560085. 5. SHREE RAMACHANDRAPURA MATH NO.24, JP ROAD, GIRINAGAR 1ST PHASE, BENGALURU-560085 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE SRI KG BHAT 6. KRISHNA G BHAT AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS S/O GANESH BHAT CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, RAMACHANDRAPURA MATH, NO.2A, JP ROAD, GIRINAGAR 1ST PHASE, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22001 WP No. 51480 of 2019 BENGALURU-560085. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.VENKAT SATYANARAYAN.A, HCGP FOR R1 TO R4; SRI.MANMOHAN,P.N, ADVOCATE FOR R5 & R6) THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR REGISTERED AGAINST THE PETITIONERS BY THE R-4 GIRINAGAR POLICE STATION IN CRIME NO.0149/2019 DATED 25.09.2019 AND PRODUCED HEREWITH AT ANNX-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MS JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI ORAL ORDER In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India r/w Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, petitioners who are arraigned as accused Nos.1, 8 and 21 have sought quashing of FIR in Cr.No.149/2019 and also for a direction to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 not to register any criminal cases against them for any posts or comments being made by them in - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22001 WP No. 51480 of 2019 Social Media Platforms, such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, WhatsApp, etc, against the misdeeds and criminal act that are going on in the 5th respondent Math or any of its branches, etc. 2. In support of the petition, the petitioners have contended that the registering of Cr.No.149/2019 dated 25.09.2019 by respondent No.4 based on the complaint filed by respondent No.6 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The said complaint is filed to harass and intimidate the petitioners and others against their silence, protest and campaign against the Swamiji of the serious allegations made against him. It is violative of Article 19 (1)(a) of the Constitution of India and their liberty is also threaten as they are being summoned to the police station. Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 have filed PIL before this Hon'ble Court against the Math and Swamiji and certain directions were issued to the Government and Chief Secretary. The said matter is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22001 WP No. 51480 of 2019 pending before the Court. For this reason, the petitioners are being targeted. 2.1. Filing of complaint and registering of FIR is nothing but abuse of the judicial process. In the complaint, it is alleged that petitioners and others have published defamatory articles on social media. In fact, charge sheet is filed against the Swamiji, on the basis of allegations and therefore, it cannot be termed as defamatory. The petitioners and others have no grievance against the Math and they are protesting against the Peethadhipathi, who is enjoying and taking shelter against the revered position occupied by him. Since charge sheet is filed against him, the petitioner and others are protesting against Swamiji, continuing in the position. There is undue delay in filing the complaint which is an afterthought. 2.2 The intention of complainant is only to harass, threaten and intimidate the petitioners and an attempt to muzzle their voices and prevent them from exercising their - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22001 WP No. 51480 of 2019 fundamental right, a case is registered on the influence by respondent Nos.5 and 6. It is gross abuse of judicial process. As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Manik Taneja and another Vs. State of Karnataka and Anr, mere criticism in the Facebook postings would not amount to criminal offence. Hence, criminal proceedings initiated against petitioners are liable to be quashed and hence the petition. 3. In support of the petition, learned counsel representing petitioners has relied upon the following decisions: (i) Manik Taneja and another Vs. State of Karnataka and Anr.(Manik Taneja)1 (ii) Jaikanth Vs. State of Karnataka (Jaikanth)2 4. On the other hand, learned counsel representing respondent No.2/complainant and learned High Court Government Pleader representing the State 1 (2015) 7 SCC 423 2 Crl.P.No.4306/2019 Dt: 11.10.2019 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22001 WP No. 51480 of 2019 would submit that petitioners and others have formed group and are in the habit of uploading defamatory information about the Math and the Pontiff. It was registered as a non-cognizable offence and with the permission of the trial Court, case is registered in Cr.No.149/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 505, 506 and 507 of IPC and investigation is taken up. Since there is stay, the investigation could not be proceeded with. The allegations made in the post published in the media makes out prima facie case against the petitioners and others. It is a matter to be investigated into and appreciated at the trial. It is not a case for quashing the criminal proceedings and pray to dismiss the petition. 5. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for respondent No.2/complainant has relied upon the decision in Priti Saraf and Anr. Vs. State of NCT of Delhi (Priti Saraf)3. 3 Crl.A.No.296/2021 [SLP(Crl)6364/2019) Dt:10.03.2021] - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22001 WP No. 51480 of 2019 6. Heard arguments and perused the record. 7. According to the petitioners, they and other accused are the devotees of Ramachandrapura Math. The documents produced by the petitioners indicate that based on several allegations, criminal and civil litigation were initiated against the Pontiff and according to the petitioners, they are in the forefront of the agitation and fight against the Pontiff. They are criticizing the Pontiff in the social media and for this reason, they are being targeted and in order to silence them, several cases are filed against them. The mere criticism against the Pontiff does not amount to offence. The concerned police are making them to sit in the police station throughout the day and harassing them. 8. Respondent Nos.5 and 6 have produced the order in W.P.No.25124/2016, wherein the Division Bench of this Court refused to interfere with the affairs of the Math and directed the parties to take up the remedy provided - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22001 WP No. 51480 of 2019 under Section 92 of the CPC for framing a scheme for administration of the Math. In Crl.RP.No.638/2016 c/w Crl.RP.No.550/2016, Co-ordinate Bench of this Court upheld the discharge of the Pontiff by the trial Court for the offence punishable under sections 376(2)(f), 376(2)(n) and 508 IPC. It is submitted by the learned counsel representing the petitioners that several serious allegations are made against the Pontiff, touching the moral turpitude and in the light of the same, they were agitating to remove the Pontiff from the Math and in this regard, the petitioners and other accused expressed their opinion on the Facebook and other social media and the same cannot be termed as offence. In fact, the suit filed against some of the petitioners and others in O.S.No.6032/2017, alleging defamation is pending and in the light of the same, the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners are liable to be quashed. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22001 WP No. 51480 of 2019 9. Thus, the documents produced by both parties clearly indicates that serious allegations are made against the Pontiff of Ramachandrapura Math, including rape and other Heinous offences. While several devotees are supporting the Pontiff, many of devotees are also opposing him. They are posting comments on the Social Media for which the present complaint is filed. The offences for which the case is registered are punishable under Sections 504, 505, 506 and 507 IPC. Since these offences are non- cognizable, the investigating officer has sought permission to conduct investigation. The trial Court has passed a criptic order stating that there is sufficient material to proceed against the petitioners. The decision of this court in Vageppa Gurulinga Jangaligi (Vaggeppa)4 Is not followed. No separate order is passed. From the order granting permission, it cannot be made out that there is application of mind. 4 2019 SCC Online Kar 2708 - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22001 WP No. 51480 of 2019 10. Already suit for permanent injunction filed against some of the petitioners and others not to publish any messages or statements or articles in print or television or social media against the Math and its Pontiff is pending. While it is for the Pontiff therein to establish that the publishing of such messages, etc would amount to defamation, Per Se, it is for the defendants to prove that the allegations made are true. As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Manik Taneja, referred to supra, the Facebook post criticizing a person would not amount to criminal intimidation. Similarly, in Jaikanth, Co-ordinate bench of this Court held that in respect of the same post made in the social media, multiple complaints cannot be entertained. In the light of these facts and circumstances, this court is of the considered opinion that continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioners would amount to abuse of the process of the Court and accordingly, the following: - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22001 WP No. 51480 of 2019 ORDER (i) Petition filed by the petitioner/accused Nos.1, 8 and 21 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India r/w Section 482 Cr.P.C is hereby allowed. (ii) The FIR in Cr.No.149/2019 of Girinagar P.S for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 505, 506 and 507 of IPC is hereby quashed. Sd/- (J.M.KHAZI) JUDGE RR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 64