Stay On Govt Order Barring Gatherings In Public Places Applies To All, Can't Be Restricted To Litigating Party: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court on Monday said that its interim order dated October 28, by which it stayed the Government Order that prohibited gatherings of ten or more persons for peaceful civic, social, or cultural activities in public places and declared such assemblies as unlawful, would be applicable to all and not limited only to the petitioners before the court.

Advocate General Shashi Kiran Shetty appearing for the state government had sought that the interim order be restricted to only to the petitioners— Punashchetana Seva Samaste,

A single Judge, Justice M Nagaprasanna in its order said “The reasons rendered in its interim order which now stands affirmed by the division bench is that the Government order flies foul of Chapter III of Constitution of India, that is the the Fundamental Rights under Article 19 (1) (a) (b). In the light of it being violative of the fundamental rights or Article 13 (2) as any fundamental right can be curtailed by a law being made and not by a government order, the Government order cannot be restricted only to the petitioners and permit it to become operational against others.”

It added “Therefore the matter would require the objections to be filed by the state government and hearing and final disposal at the hands of this court.”

Shetty sought four weeks time to file the objections. Accordingly the court has now posted the matter for further hearing on December 15. It has clarified that its interim order shall continue till the next date of hearing.

The bench by its order dated October 28, had stayed the government order. Following which the state government moved an appeal before the division bench. The court vide its order dated November 6 dismissed the appeal.

The division bench has said “Whether the impugned Government Order is violative of Article 19 of the Constitution or any other provision; or whether it is arbitrary or unreasonable; or whether by way of an executive order, rights of the citizens could be curtailed, is yet to be determined. The observation of the learned Single Judge is only prima facie. Considering the above contentions of the appellants/State even before learned Single Judge records his finding would amount to usurping the jurisdiction of the learned Single Judge and if considered, nothing would remain for consideration by the learned Single Judge.”

It had added “When the appellants have a remedy of filing an interlocutory application for vacating the interim order and when the learned Single Judge has fixed the date for further hearing on 17.11.2025, it would not be appropriate for this Court to interfere with the ex parte interim order passed by the learned Single Judge.”

Case Title: PUNASHCHETANA SEVA SAMSTE & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WP 107929/2025