Karnataka High Court
Rashtriya Suraksha Janandolan Samithi ... vs The Commissioner Of Police Mysore on 24 February, 2025
Author: R Devdas
Bench: R Devdas
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:8080
WP No. 5408 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS
WRIT PETITION NO. 5408 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE)
BETWEEN:
1. RASHTRIYA SURAKSHA JANANDOLAN
SAMITHI MYSORE
UNREGD. ORGANIZATION
REP BY ITS CONVENOR
SRI MAHESH B B
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
S/O BABU B
R/AT 194, SRI BOTLAPPA YUVA SHANGH
BUILDING KADAGADALU TQ
MADIKERI, KODAGU DISTRICT
KARNATAKA- 571248
2. SRI MAHESH B B
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
S/O BABU B
Digitally signed by R/AT 194, SRI BORLAPPA YUVA SHANGH
KRISHNAPPA LAXMI BUILDING KADAGADALU TQ
YASHODA
Location: HIGH COURT
MADIKERI KODAGU DISTRICT
OF KARNATAKA KARNATAKA- 571248
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. ARUNA SHYAM M., SR. COUNSEL A/W
SRI. SUYOG HERELE E.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE MYSORE
MYSORE DISTRICT
KARNATAKA -570010
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:8080
WP No. 5408 of 2025
2. POLICE INSPECTOR
KRISHNARAJA POLICE STATION
MYSORE DISTRICT
KARNATAKA- 570024
3. THE POLICE INSPECTOR
DEVARAJA POLICE STATION
MYSORE DISTRICT -570001
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.K. SHAHSIKIRAN SHETTY, AG
SRI. V.G. BHANUPRAKASH., AAG A/W
SRI. SHAMANTH NAIK., HCGP)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ENDORSEMENT DATED 20/02/2025 IN NO. N/KRPS/CC//2025
AND SUM DRPS/CC//2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2
AND 3 AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT THERE TO
(PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND B) AN ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS
ORAL ORDER
The 1st petitioner is an unregistered organization and
the 2nd petitioner as a convener of the organisation has
given a written request at Annexure-D to the Police
Commissioner, Mysore on 18.02.2025 seeking permission
to hold a rally today at 10:00am enabling the procession
NC: 2025:KHC:8080
to be held commencing from the Gun House to Kote
Anjaneya Swamy Temple. There are four reasons stated in
the representation which forms the basis or the reason for
the petitioners to hold a rally. However, the impugned
endorsement has been issued to the petitioner on
20.02.2025 declining to grant permission where it is stated
that having regard to the purpose for which the rally is
sought to be taken out, there is a clear possibility of the
rally disturbing the peace and tranquility of the public and
has a potential to instigate communal clashes and it would
become difficult for the police to maintain law and order.
2. Learned Senior Counsel Sri Arun Shyam appearing
for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners have
a fundamental right to hold a rally or a peaceful protest. It
is submitted that on 10.02.2025, the Udayagiri Police at
Mysore suffered due to the stone pelting at the hands of
certain members of the society. The petitioners want to
hold out a rally showing that the public in Mysore stand
with the police and they condemn the acts of such unruly
NC: 2025:KHC:8080
mobs, which pelted stones against the police. Learned
Senior Counsel therefore submitted that the respondent
Commissioner of Police, Mysore, should have permitted
the holding of the rally.
3. Attention of this Court is drawn to a judgment
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anita Thakur
and Others /vs./Government of Jammu and Kashmir
and others - (2016) 15 SCC 525, where it was held
that citizens are guaranteed fundamental right of speech,
right to assemble for the purpose of carrying peaceful
protest processions and right of free movement. Learned
Senior Counsel would also submit that having regard to
the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
said case, the petitioners are ready and willing to give
necessary undertaking and a bond, in terms of the
directions issued by a Co-ordinate bench of this court in
the case of Sri Veeranjaneya Dharma Jagruthi Balaga
and another /vs./ The State of Karnataka and others
in W.P.No.15400/2023 dated 18.07.2023.
NC: 2025:KHC:8080
4. On the other hand, learned Advocate General in
the morning session submitted that under similar
circumstances, when the permission was granted for
holding peaceful protest, the protest turned unruly and
there were many cases of injury sustained by the general
public. As a consequence, he is today before the Dharwad
Bench of this Court answering the questions raised by this
Court in the matter of protecting public peace and
tranquility and compensation payable to the injured
persons. Learned Advocate General submitted that the
persons like the petitioners and the organization would
state before this Court that they would take responsibility
if any untoward incident happens during the rally or
protest. However, when things go out of control and on
account of the violent mob injury is sustained by the
general public and the property, the petitioners will throw
up their hand and run away. Ultimately, it would be on
the State and its police personnel to answer the queries
that would be raised by the Court.
NC: 2025:KHC:8080
5. Having regard to the background in which the
protest is sought to be carried out at the hands of the
petitioners, this Court suggested that it would be very
difficult for the police to control the crowd if the rally is
taken out on the public streets. Therefore, a suggestion
was made by this Court that any large area, though not
designated for holding protest, if identified by the
petitioners, then this Court may direct the respondent
police to consider grant of permission. Learned Additional
Advocate General, who was present in the Court was also
requested to find out from the Mysore Police as to whether
there is any such open space, where the protest can be
held peacefully.
6. Learned Additional Advocate General has come
back to this Court saying that there are only two places
where such a protest can be held accommodating a fairly
large crowd. However, it is found that in one of the place
suggested prior permission will have to be taken and fees
will have to be paid. Therefore, the only other option
NC: 2025:KHC:8080
available is Football Ground at Mysore. However, the
learned Additional Advocate General would add that
Section 144 has been imposed in Mysore city foreseeing
any trouble that would be caused because of the proposed
rally and protest and Commissioner of Police may require
some more time to relax the imposition of Section 144
only to the limited area, where protest is permitted to be
held.
7. Consequently the writ petition stands disposed
of directing the respondent - Commissioner of Police,
Mysore to permit the petitioners to hold a peaceful rally
only within the premises of the Football ground at Mysore.
For that purpose, the Commissioner of Police may also
pass necessary orders relaxing the conditions imposed in
Section 144 only to the area where the protest is
permitted to be held. The petitioners shall execute a bond
in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh) in favour of
the jurisdictional Tahsildar and same shall be tendered
before the Commissioner of Police. The entire proceedings
NC: 2025:KHC:8080
shall be videographed both by the petitioners as well as
the respondent police. Needless to observe that the
protest will be held peacefully and the organizers,
petitioners shall ensure that provocative statements will
not be made which may incite communal feelings either
amongst the persons present in the ground or in the
general public. If any untoward incident occurs, the
petitioners will be held liable for the same. The protest and
the proceedings shall be held only for a limited period of
one hour or one and half hour and not further. The time
for holding the protest is tentatively fixed at 3.30 p.m.
Needless to observe that the respondent - Commissioner
of Police and the State shall deploy sufficient force to take
care of the law and order.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
(R DEVDAS)
JUDGE
KLY
CT: JL
