- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11366 WP No. 106444 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 106444 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SHREE SIDDALINGAYYA MAHASWAMI SHREE KARNESHWAR MATHA AANDHOL AGE: 50 YEARS, R/O JEVARGI-585310, DIST: KALABURAGI …PETITIONER (BY SRI B.C. JNANAYYASWAMI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-01. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BALLARI-583101. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE RAKESH S HARIHAR Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11366 WP No. 106444 of 2025 BALLARI-583101. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BALLARI-583101. 5. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SIRUGUPPA, BALLARI DISTRICT-583101. 6. THE CPI, SIRUGUPPA P.S BALLARI DISTRICT-583115. 7. THE PSI SIRUGUPPA P.S BALLARI DISTRICT-583115. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W 528 OF BNSS, PRAYING TO, QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 02.09.2025 BEARING NO.SUM.CUM/M.A.G/30/2025-26 PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER/RESPONDENT NO.3, BALLARI VIDE ANNEXURE- B IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11366 WP No. 106444 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) 1. Petitioner is before this Court under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of BNSS 2023 with a prayer to quash the order dated 02.09.2025 bearing No.SAM:CUM/M.A.G./30/2025-26 passed by respondent No.3-Assistant Commissioner. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the respondent. 3. For the purpose of celebrating Ganesha Festival at Siruguppa, Hindu Maha Ganapati Samiti, Siruguppa has organised 10 days function in which the petitioner has been invited to give a public speech on the subject ‘Jagrut Hindu Balista Bharata’. On the basis of the report dated 27.08.2025 received from the CPI, Siruguppa Circle, the respondent No.3-Assistant Commissioner, in exercise of his powers under Sections 162 and 163 of BNSS 2023, has issued the order impugned restricting the petitioner from entering Ballari District from 12.00 a.m. on 02.09.2025 to - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11366 WP No. 106444 of 2025 12.00 a.m. on 10.09.2025. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the ground urged in the petition, submits that, the petitioner's right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India is infringed as a result of the order impugned. Out of the 19 cases registered against the petitioner, only 3 cases are pending. For extraneous reasons, the order impugned has been passed. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP who has opposed the petition brings to the notice of this Court that multiple criminal cases are registered against the petitioner, invoking offences punishable under Sections 153A, 295 and 295A of IPC. In the year 2025, 2 criminal cases are registered against him. Petitioner is a person having criminal antecedents and he is known for making public speeches and hurting the religious sentiments of the communities. During the earlier years also there have been incidents at Siruguppa wherein people belonging to different - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11366 WP No. 106444 of 2025 communities had fought against each other. Based on the report received from the police, with an intention to prevent any such untoward incidents, as a precautionary measure, the order impugned has been passed, which cannot be found fault with. Accordingly, she prays to dismiss the petition. 6. The fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of India are crucial and important for smooth functioning of a democratic society, but they are subject to reasonable restrictions provided under the very same Article. These restrictions are provided in the interest of the Society, State and Nation at large. Restriction on speech can be imposed if there is a reasonable threat to public disorder, rioting or any kind of violence which is likely to disturb public tranquillity. The Courts are required to examine whether the restrictions are reasonable and necessary for maintaining public order or any of the other legitimate interest mentioned in Article 19(2) to 19(6). If - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11366 WP No. 106444 of 2025 only the restriction is found unnecessary, unreasonable, arbitrary or excessive, then the Courts need to interfere. 7. Perusal of the material on the record would go to show that petitioner is a person with criminal antecedent and multiple FIRs have been registered against him by various police stations, invoking offences punishable under Sections 153A, 295 & 295A of IPC, along with other offences punishable under the IPC and also punishable under the provisions of BNS 2023. 8. Section 153A of IPC provides punishment for promoting enmity between two groups on the ground of religion, race etc. and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony, while Section 295 of IPC provides punishment for injuring or defiling a place of worship with intent to insult the religion of any class. Section 295A of IPC provides punishment for deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage the religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs. Though learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that out of the 19 cases registered - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11366 WP No. 106444 of 2025 against him, 16 criminal cases have been closed, no material has been produced along with this petition in support of the said contention. Petitioner has a history of giving deliberate public speeches intending to outrage the religious feelings of a community. In the programme that is scheduled to be held today i.e., 04.09.2025, petitioner is supposed to make public speech on the subject ‘Jagrut Hindu Balista Bharata’. 9. Section 162 of BNSS 2023 provides for power of the Magistrate to prohibit repetition or continuance of public nuisance and Section 163 of BNSS 2023 provides power to issue order in urgent cases of nuisance or apprehended danger to prevent obstruction, annoyance, or danger to human life, health, or safety, or a disturbance of public tranquillity. Considering the background of the petitioner, and the subject in which the petitioner is supposed to make a public speech on 04.09.2025, based on the police report received, the respondent No.3-Assistant Commissioner, in excise of his powers under Section 163 of BNSS 2023 has - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11366 WP No. 106444 of 2025 passed the impugned order. Section 163 of BNSS 2023 provides that if the competent authority considers that orders under Section 163 is required to be passed so as to prevent or tend to prevent any danger to human life, health or safety, or a disturbance of the public tranquillity, or a riot, he is empowered to pass such orders giving reasons for the same. In cases of emergency, such orders can be passed even ex-parte against the person. 10. The respondent No.3 taking into consideration the history of criminal cases registered against the petitioner wherein he has allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 153A, 295, 295A of IPC multiple times, based on the police report dated 27.08.2025, has passed the impugned order so as to prevent any danger to public tranquillity. In the order impugned itself, the respondent No.3 has made an observation that Siruguppa town has a history of communal disturbance and it is under these circumstances he has passed the preventive order against the petitioner, which cannot be found fault with. The - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11366 WP No. 106444 of 2025 3rd respondent has observed that since the festivals of two communities are being celebrated at the same time, any act if committed prejudicial to communal harmony between different religions, there could be law and order problem and to avoid repetition of incidents that had happened during earlier years, as a precautionary measure, the order impugned is passed. In the memorandum of petition or during the course of arguments, petitioner has not stated that he has no intention to insult any religion or outrage the religious feeling of any class or community during the course of his proposed public speech. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that this petition does not merit consideration. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. 11. Pending I.As., if any, do not survive for consideration. Sd/- (S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE KGK /CT:GSM List No.: 3 Sl No.: 1