Karnataka High Court Stays FIR Against BJP State President And Social Media Cell Manager For Social Media Post

The Karnataka High Court has granted a stay on the FIR and criminal proceedings initiated against B.Y. Vijayendra, Karnataka State President of the BJP and MLA representing Shikaripura constituency, along with Prashant Makanur, Social Media Cell Manager of the BJP for a post on the official handle of BJP on X (Twitter).

The Single-Judge Bench of Justice Krishna S. Dixit passed the interim stay order on June 21. 

Senior Advocate Aruna Shyam appeared for the Petitioner.

The FIR alleged offences under Sections 505(2) and 153A of the Indian Penal Code, along with Section 125 of the Representation of People Act, 1950, 1951, and 1989. The allegations stem from a tweet posted on the official BJP Karnataka handle, @BJP4Karnataka, criticizing the governance style of the Congress government in the state as well as comments on CM Siddaramaiah, Deputy CM D.K Shivkumar, and Rahul Gandhi.

The FIR accused the Petitioner of attempting to incite hate among caste, race, linguistic groups, and religions, purportedly to sway votes during the electoral period in violation of the model code of conduct.

The Petitioner in the plea contended that the FIR is politically motivated, orchestrated by the ruling political party to tarnish his reputation and stifle his freedom of speech. Emphasizing his status as a law-abiding citizen and elected representative, he asserts innocence of the alleged offences. In his petition before the Court, the Petitioner argued that the FIR lacks merit and is based on absurd and inherently improbable allegations. He asserts that no evidence exists to substantiate the accusations, which he claims were fabricated to harass and humiliate him for political reasons.

Citing recent Supreme Court precedents, including Javed Ahmad Hajam v. State of Maharashtra (2024), the Petitioner underscored the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution. He also argued that legitimate dissent and criticism of government policies are integral to democracy and cannot be stifled through misuse of legal processes.

The Petitioner further contends that the allegations do not establish any intent or motive on his part to incite violence or disorder, which are essential elements of the offences alleged under IPC sections 505(2) and 153A.

Cause Title: Sri B.Y. Vijayendra and Anr. v. The State of Karnataka and Anr. [Crl. P. 5478 of 2024 & Crl. P. 5505 of 2024]