Today (06 Feb, 2024), the Karnataka High Court declined to quash the non-bailable arrest warrants issued for Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, along with Ministers Ramalinga Reddy and MB Patil, as well as All India Congress Committee (AICC) leader Randeep Singh Surjewala. Additionally, the court imposed a fine of Rs 10,000 on each of the four individuals.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has made a decisive ruling against quashing the warrant issued for Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, stemming from protests that took place in 2022. This case has garnered attention due to its implications on political accountability and the legal boundaries of protest actions.
The core of this legal battle revolves around an incident that unfolded near Race View Hotel on April 14, 2022. Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, along with other ministers, found themselves embroiled in controversy following a protest that demanded the resignation and arrest of then Minister KS Eeshwarappa. The protest was ignited by the tragic death by suicide of contractor Santosh, which the demonstrators linked to Eeshwarappa.
ALSO READ: Court Grants Custody Parole to Manish Sisodia for Visiting Ailing Wife
The court’s proceedings were initiated based on allegations that the protest orchestrated by the petitioners not only disrupted public traffic but also posed a threat to law and order in the vicinity. This led to the issuance of non-bailable arrest warrants and special court proceedings by the 42nd ACMM Court (Special Court of the People’s Representatives), a move that the Chief Minister and his associates sought to overturn.
The plea presented by the Chief Minister and the involved ministers aimed to quash these legal actions, arguing against the basis of the warrants and the proceedings. However, the Karnataka High Court’s refusal to quash the warrant underscores the judiciary’s stance on maintaining law and order, and the accountability of public figures in their protest actions.
Justice Krishna S Dixit emphasised on equality of all in the eyes of law, asserting that both a postman and the Prime Minister are subject to criminal law provisions.
“Prime Minister, Postman, in criminal law, stand on similar footing,” the Court said.
This ruling not only emphasizes the legal responsibilities that come with holding public office but also sets a precedent for how protests led by political figures are perceived and handled by the law. The imposition of a ₹10,000 fine further punctuates the court’s message regarding the seriousness of obstructing public services and endangering societal peace.
As this case unfolds, it remains a pivotal moment that highlights the delicate balance between the right to protest and the imperative to uphold public order. The Karnataka High Court’s decision serves as a reminder of the legal limits within which political activism must operate, ensuring that the pursuit of justice and accountability does not infringe upon the collective rights and safety of the public.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
