Karnataka High Court Stays Hate Speech FIR Against RSS Leader Citing SC Order Upholding Guidelines For Cases Over Social Media Posts

The Karnataka High Court on Friday (February 6) stayed investigation in an FIR against RSS Leader Prabhakar Bhat booked for giving a speech in a college in Puttur circulated on a YouTube channel, referring to Supreme Court's recent decision upholding guidelines on registration of FIRs over social media posts. 

For context, Bhat moved the high court seeking quashing of an FIR over registered at Puttur town for offences under BNS Sections 196(Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony) ,299(Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs), 302(Uttering words, etc., with deliberate intent to wound religious feelings of any person), 353(2)(Statements conducing to public mischief), 3(5)(Common Intention).

At the outset, Senior advocate Aruna Shyam appearing for Bhat said that the Supreme Court had in State of Telangana v. Nalla Balu affirmed guidelines issued by Telangana High Court regulating registration of FIRs in cases arising out of social media posts and directing the police not to mechanically register FIRs over "harsh, offensive, or critical political speeches". He also referred to decision in Satendar Kumar Antil v CBI case. 

Shyam said, "High Time your lordship may reiterate the same guidelines so that it will be covering the field, both registration of FIR as well as..."

For context, the Telangana High Court had in its guidelines among various aspects said that no case alleging promotion of enmity, intentional insult, public mischief, threat to public order, or sedition with respect to social media posts shall be registered unless there exists prima facie material disclosing incitement to violence, hatred, or public disorder. This threshold must be applied in line with the principles laid down in Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar and Shreya Singhal v. Union of India.

The High Court's operational guidelines were for police authorities and Judicial Magistrates while dealing with proceedings initiated on the basis of social media posts, particularly at the stage of registration of FIRs. It had also observed that "automatic or mechanical arrests are impermissible, and the principle of proportionality in the exercise of criminal process must be observed".

In view of the same, Justice M Nagaprassana in his order said:

"The issue is with regard to a speech made by petitioner and circulated on social media. The Apex Court in its latest judgment...has affirmed the guidelines laid down by Telangana High Court wherein the high court has clearly held that arrest cannot be made in social media post unless a 35(3) (BNSS) notice is issued and the accused is heard in the matter. The said procedure is admittedly not followed in the case at hand. In light of the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Satendar Kumar Antil there shall be interim order of stay of all further investigation qua the petitioner until the next date of hearing".

The matter is next listed on February 11. 

On Thursday the State government had opposed Bhat's plea arguing that his speech shows that he is trying to create hatred between communities wherein youngsters may cultivate feeling of hatred against a community.

Case title: DR. PRABHAKAR BHAT v/s THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

CRL.P 941/2026