The Supreme Court in the case Siddaramaiah Versus State Of Karnataka And Anr. observed and has stayed the proceedings in the criminal case against the Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah which being over a protest march which is conducted by him in the year 2022 wherein it demanded the resignation of then Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Minister KS Eshwarappa.
The court in the case observed and has stayed the proceedings against present State Ministers Ramalinga Reddy and MB Patil, and the All-India Congress Committee, AICC leader Randeep Singh Surjewala over the same protest.
The bench comprising of Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra in the case was hearing the petition filed challenging the order of Karnataka High Court, wherein the court refused to quash the criminal case initiated against Siddaramaiah and others.
The counsel, Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Siddaramaiah, submitted before the court that it was a ‘political protest’ and the criminal case was a violation of the right to protest under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The political protest conducted peacefully without any criminal intent cannot be muzzled using penal provisions.
The bench headed by Justice Mishra in the case observed and stated that every public protest in the street, disrupting normal life, should be allowed on the grounds of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. Thus, when the Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi submitetd that a political protest has to be seen differently.
Adding to it, the bench of Justice Mishra asked, ‘Your argument is that if a politician does it, it should be allowed, but if a normal citizen does, it should not be? How can it be quashed just because it is being done by a politician?’.
The bench of Justice Mishra stated that, Did you seek permission for the demonstration? You have not on one fine morning you assemble in thousands and you say nothing can happen to us because we are protesting.
On the other hand, the counsel, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, also appearing for Siddaramaiah submitted before the court that the case was about a ‘law and order allegation’ and not a ‘public order allegation’.
He submitted that, ‘Law and order’ is not a ground of restriction under Article 19(2) of Constitution, as it mentions only ‘public order.’
The bench headed by Justice Roy, later dictated the order, wherein the court issued the notice to the respondents returnable within six weeks and staying the further proceedings in the case.
Further, the court stayed order of Karnataka High Court’s, wherein the court has imposed costs of Rs 10,000 each on the petitioners while dismissing their petitions.
Therefore, the High Court rejected the prayer to stay the judgment to enable filing an appeal before the top Court and has directed Siddaramaiah to appear before the Special Court on February 26, 2024.
The prosecution case was that on 14.04.2022, a group of 35 to 40 members under the leadership of Randeep Surjewala, Rajya Sabha MP, DK Shivakumar, the Deputy CM, Karnataka and Siddaramaiah entered the public road towards residence of then CM, shouting slogans and demanding the resignation of KS Eshwarappa. Thus, they were being booked for unlawful assembly under Section 143 of the Indian Penal Code, IPC and Section 103 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963. Allegedly, the protest was led despite a High Court order being in operation against conducting of marches in Bengaluru, other than at Freedom Park.
Therefore, the Siddaramaiah pled before the High Court that the action of police officials was malafide, vindictive and intended to persecute, as the subject protest was held on April 14, 2022 whereas the High Court order was of August 1, 2022.
The Karnataka High Court in its order dated August 01, 2022 stated that the Karnataka government was directed to ensure compliance of the Licensing and Regulation of Protests, Demonstrations and Protest Marches (Bengaluru City) Order, 2021 issued under the Karnataka Police Act, permitting procession, dharna and protest only at Freedom Park in Bengaluru. Thus, the said order came in a suo motu public interest litigation initiated pursuant to a sitting High Court judge’s letter to the Chief Justice following major traffic block in the city.
The court while considering the facts and circumstances of the case stated that it being worthwhile to mention that on March 3, 2022, the High Court had passed an interim order directing the Karnataka government to ensure that no protest, processions, etc. were held in Bengaluru except at Freedom Park, so that traffic in the city was not adversely affected.
