Dharmasthala Burial Case: Karnataka High Court Stays Summons To Lawyer Booked For Allegedly Spreading False Information About Probe

The Karnataka High Court directed the police not to take coercive steps against an advocate–representing a woman who had claimed that her daughter went missing in 2003 at Dharmasthala– who issued a press release informing about the progress of the investigation in the burial case. The high court also kept in abeyance summons issued to the lawyer on September 1, till the next date of hearing.Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum in his order said:“Sri. S.Rajshekar, learned counsel accepts notice to respondent No.2. B.N.Jagadish, learned Special counsel is directed to accept notice to respondent No.1. Petitioner's counsel to serve two sets of copies of the writ petition on the standing counsel. Meanwhile, respondent No.1/Investigating Agency is directed not to take any coercive steps till the next date of hearing...” The high court referred to Supreme Court's order in a suo-motu matter where the apex court had in its prima facie view said that summoning of legal professionals by prosecuting agencies/police in relation to client information or advice given is untenable and a threat to autonomy of the legal profession. It also referred to a circular issued by the ED as per which a legal practitioner cannot be compelled to disclose any communication made to him in the course and for the purpose of his professional service as such legal practitioner, by or on behalf of his client unless with his client's express consent. The circular also said that no summons can be issued to a lawyer for their professional services. "In view of the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the above extracted interim orders and the Circular dated 20.06.2025, the summons dated 01.09.2025 shall be kept in abeyance till the next date of hearing. Re-list in fresh matters list on 08.10.2025," the high court added. The petitioner has approached court seeking to quash the case registered under the Sections 353(1)(b) and 353(2) (offences relating to public mischief) BNS, claiming it to be wholly misconceived, legally untenable, and violative of the petitioners fundamental rights.Section 353(1)(b) states that whoever makes, publishes or circulates any statement, false information, rumour, or report, including through electronic means with intent to cause, or which is likely to cause, fear or alarm to the public, or to any section of the public whereby any person may be induced to commit an offence against the State or against the public tranquillity shall be punished.Section 353(2) states that whoever makes any statement or report containing false information, rumour or alarming news, including through electronic means, with intent to create or promote, or which is likely to create or promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, feelings of enmity, hatred or ill will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, shall be punished. The plea states that petition is a qualified advocate and registered with the Karnataka State Bar Council. An FIR was registered at Dharmasthala Police Station over serious allegations made by a former sanitation worker who claimed he was coerced into burying over 100's of dead bodies, majorly of women and minors between 1995-2014 at Dharmasthala.The plea claims that one Sujatha Bhat had reached out to the petitioner and swore on god that her daughter went missing in Dharmasthala in 2003 and was subsequently raped and murdered.The plea claims that as an Advocate the petitioner rightly advised Bhat that she must approach the appropriate authority and render her representation. The petitioner, understanding the gravity of the situation and the systematic attempts to deny justice to his client, committed himself to provide fearless legal representation. On 30th July 2025, in discharge of his professional duties and in his capacity as counsel for Sujatha Bhat, the petitioner had issued a press release titled "Smt. Sujatha Bhat's Unwavering Resolve as Dharmasthala Exhumation Continue." The plea claims the said press release was issued with the bona fide intention of keeping the public informed about the progress of the investigation and to demonstrate his client's unwavering commitment to the quest for truth and justice in the matter of her missing daughter.However, only based on the complaint made by Respondent no.2 and without conducting any preliminary inquiry or verification of facts, an FIR was registered alleging that petitioner published false information with the intention to cause public mischief, create fear and alarm among public. The matter is next listed on October 8. Case Title: Manjunath N AND State of Karnataka & ANRCase No: WP 26945/2025 Appearance: Advocate Yashan B K for Petitioner. Advocate S.Rajshekar, for R2. SPP B.N.Jagadish, for R1.Click Here To Read/Download Order

Dharmasthala Burial Case: Karnataka High Court Stays Summons To Lawyer Booked For Allegedly Spreading False Information About Probe

Mustafa Plumber

Tags