Karnataka HC Quashes Order Of State Restraining Orator Chakravarthy Sulibele From Entering Kalaburagi To Speak At Event By 'Namo Brigade'
The Karnataka High Court’s Kalaburagi Bench allowed a Writ Petition quashing orders issued by the Assistant Commissioner and the Tahsildar of Kalaburagi District restraining Orator Chakravarthy Sulibele from entering Kalaburagi division to speak at a function organised by "Namo Brigade".
The High Court allowed a Writ Petition wherein the said Chakravarthy Sulibele and others prayed for quashing the orders passed by respondents and seeking a direction to respondents to not interfere with the program.
The Bench of Justice V Srishananda held that there was total non-application of mind on the part of the Assistant Commissioner and the Tehsildar while passing the prohibitory orders. "Though petitioners have made several allegations stating that the authorities are acting as puppets in the hands of the elected Government, suffice to say that there is totally inapplication of mind on the part of the Assistant Commissioner and the Tahsildar in passing the orders at Annexures-A and A1", the Court held.
Senior Advocate Aruna Shyam appeared for the Petitioner while Additional Advocate General Vikram Huyligol appeared for the State and its authorities.A program was organised by Namo Brigade where Chakravarti Sulibele was invited as a chief guest. A request for granting permission was made to the Tehsildar regarding the same and the permission was accorded with some conditions. However, thereafter, the Assistant Commissioner passed a hurried order a day before the program, exercising his powers under Sections 133, 143, 144 and 144 A of Cr.PC prohibiting Sulibele from entering the talukas of Kalaburagi subdivision.
It was argued on behalf of the Petitioners that the orders were mechanical and at the behest of the elected government in Karnataka without any subjective semblance on the part of the Assistant Commissioner and the Tehsildar.
The Additional Advocate General arguing in support of the orders passed by the respondents and referred to the past speeches of Sulibele and the need for such prohibitive actions to prevent chaotic situations arising out of such speeches.
After perusing the orders passed by both authorities, the Court noted that there was no mention of any change of circumstances after granting permission, which led to the Assistant Commissioner’s order. It also noted the total disregard by the authorities for the principles of law settled by the Apex Court in various cases including K.S.Puttuswamy vs Union of India and Anuradha Bhasin vs Union of India.
The High Court further emphasised that though no evidence needs to be collected for exercising powers under Section 144 of CrPC, the Assistant Commissioner must record the subjective satisfaction of the imminent need for passing such an order. The Court noted that there is no mention of any imminent need to pass such an order apart from a letter by the Superintendent of Police mentioning past conduct of the Petitioner, which was quoted in the order.
The Court thus quashed the orders of the authorities and allowed the Writ Petition.
Cause Title- Chakravarthy Sulibele @ Mithun Chakravarthy Devidas Shet & Ors. v. The State of Karnataka & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024: KHC-K: 1841)
Appearance:
Appellants: Senior Counsel Aruna Shyam, G.R. Basavakiran, E. Suyog Herale
Respondent: Additional Advocate General Vikram Huyligol