Karnataka HC Directs Inquiry Into Police Action Against Protestors Seeking Reservation For Panchamasali Community After Allegations Of 'Lathi Charge'

The Karnataka High Court has directed the State Government to constitute a Commission of Inquiry headed by a retired Judge of the High Court, into the police action (lathi charge) taken on 10-12-2024 at Suvarna Soudha, Belagavi, against the petitioners and several others who are said to have held a peaceful protest demanding reservation for the Panchamasali Community.Justice M Nagaprasanna passed the order while allowing a petition filed by Sri Jagadguru Basava Jaymrityunjay Swamiji and others. He said, “The respondents/State to constitute a Commission of Inquiry in terms of the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952 on the subject matter and the appointed Commission of Inquiry should be single member or a multi member headed by a retired Judge of this Court. The Commission of Inquiry so appointed shall submit its report within three months of such appointment.” The petitioners are the members of the Panchamasali Community. They are said to have undertaken peaceful protests all over the area, requesting the Government to implement the Government order dated 27-03-2023. The petitioners had earlier represented to the Deputy Commissioner, Belagavi, seeking permission to protest. The Deputy Commissioner, Belagavi on 08-12-2024 passed an order prohibiting all vehicles coming towards Suvarna Soudha in the wake of protest. It is alleged that close to 10,000 persons assembled in Kondaskoppa Village which is about 1.5 kms. from Suvarna Soudha and held a meeting as a prelude to the protest march. Several members of the Legislative Assembly also participated in the meeting and emphasized on the need for the Government's intervention to address the matter. It appears that some of the Members wanted to go to Suvarna Soudha to submit their representation. They then decided to peacefully walk towards Suvarna Soudha and assemble there and request the Chief Minister to consider the representation. It is alleged that the Police machinery charged towards the members assembled there prevented them from approaching Suvarna Soudha and ordered lathi charge totally unprovoked which resulted in grave injuries to several members of the crowd assembled at the said place. The petitioners seeking inquiry contended that no orders as necessary under the Police manual or under the CrPC were ever notified or made known to the protesting public. Therefore, due to the atrocity committed upon the peaceful protestors there should be an inquiry. The inquiry is not at the hands of Police or bureaucrats, but it should be under the Commission of Inquiry Act, in which event, the guilty would not go scot-free. The government opposed the plea, submitting that the petitioners were not victims but were aggressors. In the light of the fact that they become aggressors, to prevent any law and order situation, an immediate lathi charge was the only option to be resorted to. If the petitioners had peacefully protested, the situation as alleged would not have emerged at all. Findings: The bench viewed the video of the incidents produced by both parties and noted “The viewing of contents of both the pen drives would depict seriously disputed questions of fact. While the protestors were lathi charged, the reason for lathi charge is missing in both the pen drives. Therefore, the reason for the incident is required to be thrashed out if the guilty have to be brought to books.” Observing that it is the duty of the Police in terms of Rule 1180 of the Karnataka Police Manual to disperse the mob of unlawful assembly with use of force. Therefore, there are allegations and contra-allegations. There is electronic content versus electronic content. The protest in the content appears to be peaceful at the beginning. The court said “What happened later is necessary to be enquired into, as the public meeting that was held prior to the protest was attended by the Legislators.” Court emphasised that it is not the case of the State that the petitioners were holding any arms. The protest has gone wrong, and going wrong of the protest necessitates an inquiry, as Section 144 of the Cr.P.C. is invoked in the spur of the moment, and lathi charge has also taken place in the spur of the moment.The court thus said “It cannot be by any State agency, as the Police Officers of the State themselves are alleged of assaulting the petitioners in the incident of the day. Therefore, in the considered view, the entire fulcrum of the lis becomes a classic illustration where an appointment of a commission of inquiry, one man or a multi member, under the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952, need to be constituted for enquiring into the allegations of the incident of the day.” Appearance: Senior Advocate Prabhuling Navadgi a/w Advocates Pooja R Savadatti, Sanjeevini Navadgi for Petitioners.Advocate General Shashikiran Shetty, a/w AAG Gangadhar J M and AGA Sharad V Magadum for RespondentsCitation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 133Case Title: SRI JAGADGURU BASAVA JAYMRITYUNJAY SWAMIJI & others AND State of...

Karnataka HC Directs Inquiry Into Police Action Against Protestors Seeking Reservation For Panchamasali Community After Allegations Of 'Lathi Charge'

Mustafa Plumber

Tags