'Police Can't Curtail Fundamental Rights Without Reasons': Karnataka High Court Quashes Order Barring Speakers At Hindu Sammelana

The Karnataka High Court quashed notices issued by the State Police prohibiting two Speakers from addressing a programme–'Hindu Sammelana' schedule for February 6 and 8, holding that police cannot arbitrarily stop a person from speaking in a public meeting based on their whims and fancies. In doing so the court said that State's curtailment of citizens' fundamental rights must be based on some reasons. Justice Lalita Kanneganti in her order said:"Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India gives every citizen the right to freedom of speech and expression. Article 19(1)(b) gives the right to assemble peacefully. It is settled law that freedom of speech includes right to express view in public meeting. However, the State has the power to impose reasonable restriction in the interest of public order, security of State, sovereignty and integrity of India, decency or morality and prevention of incitement to office. The Karnataka Police Act, 1963 permits the police to regulate the public assemblies and processions. They can prohibit the assembly, if there is apprehension of disturbance threat to public peace and tranquility and if there is any risk of violence. The police cannot arbitrarily stop a person from speaking in a public meeting basing on their whims and fancies. When the State is curtailing the citizens' fundamental rights, it shall be based on reasoning and based on some material".The court referred to Supreme Court's decision in Anuradha Bhasin Vs Union of India & others where it was observed that restrictions on speech must satisfy the proportionality test and State must justify the necessity. It thereafter said:"Just because certain cases are registered against the speakers, that itself cannot be a reason for the police to pass such an order prohibiting them from participating/delivering speech in the Sammelan, which is scheduled to be held on 06.02.2026 and 08.02.2026. The submission of learned AAG that certain cases are registered against these two speakers, in response it is submitted by the Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners that they had already participated in similar such programs and nothing untoward instance had happened in those programs. This strengthens the case of the petitioners. Be that as it may, the order that is passed by the respondents is bereft of reasons and the respondents cannot curtail the fundamental rights of the citizens in this manner".The petitioner society approached ACP, Belgavi respondent No.2 with a representation dated 13.01.2026 stating that the 'Hindu Sammelana' would be held on 08.02.2026 near Shivalaya of Shahunagar. One Kumari Harika Manjunath would be addressing the gathering.The petitioner society submitted another representation stating that Hindu Sammelana would be held on 06.02.2026, near Sree Nagar, Sai Baba Temple. On this day, one Sri. Mithun Chakravathy Devidas Shet @ Chakravathy Sulibeli, who is a staunch nationalist and a law-abiding citizen of the nation and a well known writer, communist and orator, columnist and writer, would address the gathering. The police in both the cases issued a notice dated 22.01.2026 rejecting the petitioner's request and prohibiting participation of both the speakers stating that FIRs are registered against them and permitting them to participate in the function would give rise to law and order issue. Against this the petitioner approached the high court. The petitioners argued that the order which is styled as a notice, issued by the respondent is contrary to the Karnataka Police Act, violates principles of natural justice and also violates fundamental right guaranteed to the citizens. It is stated that the Police without valid reasons and without giving an opportunity had passed the order prohibiting the above referred two persons from participating in the Function which is scheduled to be held on 06.02.2026 and 08.02.2026. It was submitted that the participation of those two speakers will not give any rise to law and order issue and that these two persons earlier had participated in similar five programs and no such untoward incidents, as portrayed, had taken place. It was argued that the respondents have no jurisdiction to interfere with the program and dictate the terms of the program. The State submitted that earlier there were instances, where the participation of these two speakers led to the law and order issue, because of which had rejected the request. It was stated that the petitioners have responded to the police's order/notice and authorities will be passing further orders after considering the petitioner's reply. It is further submitted that the whole endeavour of the State is to see that no untoward incident would take place and this precaution was taken because of previous experience. The court thus quashed the police's notice and directed the authorities to consider the representations filed by the petitioners seeking permission, in accordance with...

'Police Can't Curtail Fundamental Rights Without Reasons': Karnataka High Court Quashes Order Barring Speakers At Hindu Sammelana

Malavika Prasad

Tags