Karnataka High Court sets aside the trial court’s gag order on media coverage of the Dharmasthala Temple burial case, stating, “Case is being sent back to the competent court for fresh consideration,” ensuring judicial reassessment.
The Karnataka High Court set-aside a media gag imposed by a Bengaluru civil court regarding the Dharmasthala mass burial case.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna granted a petition from the YouTube channel Kudla Rampage, which challenged the order that prohibited media outlets and YouTube channels from disseminating defamatory content about the family managing the Dharmasthala Temple.
The Court stated,
“The application filed by Kudla Rampage Editor-in-Chief Ajay is partially allowed. The impugned ex parte injunction order passed by the trial court on 8.7.2025 is quashed. The case is being sent back to the competent court for fresh consideration of the interlocutory application. The trial court should take note of the points made in this order. The competent court should decide the case expeditiously. This court has not expressed any opinion on the civil suit, criminal proceedings, charges, counter-charges. All arguments between the parties are kept open except for one point considered in the order.”
Harshendra Kumar D, the brother of Dharmasthala Dharmadhikari Veerendra Heggade, approached the trial court following the emergence of multiple news reports featuring allegations from a sanitation worker who claimed he had buried numerous bodies in Dharmasthala.
Expressing concerns about potential irreparable harm and damage to reputation, X Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge Vijaya Kumar Rai issued an order restricting the defendants and unidentified individuals from posting or sharing any defamatory content across digital, social, or print media until the next hearing.
In his defamation suit prompted by these reports, Kumar provided a list of 8,842 links, which included 4,140 YouTube videos, 932 Facebook posts, 3,584 Instagram posts, 108 news articles, 37 Reddit posts, and 41 tweets submitted to the court.
Subsequently, Kudla Rampage challenged this order in the High Court.
Advocate A Velan represented Kudla Rampage, while Senior Advocate Udaya Holla represented Harshendra Kumar.
Also Read: “Buried Several Bodies Under Threat”: Karnataka Man’s Chilling Confession Shocks Police
A digital media platform has moved the High Court challenging an ex parte interim order passed by a Bengaluru court on July 18, which restrained multiple media outlets and YouTube channels from publishing, sharing, or broadcasting any so-called “defamatory content” or information concerning Harshendra Kumar D the brother of Dharmasthala Dharmadhikari Veerendra Heggade as well as his family, institutions managed by them, and the Sri Manjunathaswamy Temple in Dharmasthala.
In its plea, the petitioner contends that the lower court’s order amounts to a clear breach of its fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
It submits,
“It is a textbook example of an unconstitutional prior restraint that creates a severe and pervasive ‘chilling effect’ on public interest journalism, effectively silencing any and all scrutiny of powerful institutions.”
Also Read: Karnataka High Court Allows Burial of Bihar Migrant Worker Ritesh Kumar
The petition further describes the platform as a digital news outlet with substantial viewership, primarily via YouTube. It argues that the ex parte order was passed without recording adequate reasons for dispensing with notice, despite the case involving significant constitutional implications, thereby rendering the order procedurally invalid.
Additionally, the plea criticises the use of vague language in the order, especially the term “defamatory content,” stating that such broad terminology and the indiscriminate blocking of nearly 9,000 URLs without specific judicial review make the order impossible to comply with.
Case Title: Kudla Rampage vs Harshendra Kumar D & Others
Case No.: W.P. No. 22528 of 2025