Karnataka High Court Dismisses Government Appeal Against Public Gathering Restrictions

The single-judge bench had previously stayed the state government's order. (File)

The Dharwad bench of Karnataka High Court on Thursday delivered a significant blow to the Congress-led Karnataka government by dismissing the state's appeal petition regarding its order that required permission for private organizations to conduct activities in public areas.

The division bench, comprised of Justice SG Pandit and Justice Geetha KB, declined to interfere with the single bench ruling and instructed the state to return to the single-judge bench for any further proceedings.

BJP and Hindu organizations have alleged that the government's original order specifically targeted the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Minister Priyank Kharge, son of AICC President Mallikarjun Kharge, had publicly remarked that people would no longer be allowed to conduct foot marches while carrying lathis, seemingly referring to the RSS Centenary padayatra event.

The initial order from the state government had been stayed by a single-judge bench, prompting the government to challenge this decision before a division bench of the Karnataka High Court.

After hearing arguments on November 4 and reserving judgment, the court announced its verdict on Thursday. The division bench clarified that it had rejected the state government's appeal against the interim stay granted by the single-judge bench on the government's notification.

Additionally, the Dharwad division bench directed that the matter should be resolved before the single-judge bench itself, constituting another setback for the state government.

The state government had recently issued an order limiting RSS activities in public and government-owned spaces. In response, the organization Punaschetana Seva Samsthe and others petitioned the High Court against this restriction.

When hearing this petition, Justice M Nagaprasanna's single-judge bench issued an interim stay on the government's order on October 28. The government subsequently appealed this stay to a division bench of the High Court.

Advocate General Shashi Kiran Shetty, representing the government, argued that the restriction was implemented solely to prevent damage to government property. He maintained that private organizations cannot hold programs on government premises without authorization, comparing it to the requirement for permission to use an empty High Court building.

In response, senior advocate Ashok Haranahalli, appearing for the respondents, contended that not all parks and playgrounds should automatically be classified as government properties. "If such rules are implemented, would even playing cricket on a ground require official permission?" he questioned.

He further argued that under the Police Act, only the District Magistrate has the authority to take such action, and that the government could have filed an application with the same single-judge bench to lift the interim stay instead of pursuing an appeal.

After hearing both sides' arguments on November 4, the Dharwad division bench had reserved its judgment before delivering Thursday's verdict.