“In view of maintaining judicial discipline”, the Karnataka High Court has stayed the investigation against BJP leader Dr Ravi Patil in the Belagavi Form 7 case till the next date of hearing, following an earlier order of a coordinate Bench in similar matters. The allegations in the FIR are untested, the Court has expressed no view on the merits, and the presumption of innocence applies.
Dharwad: Following an order passed by a coordinate Bench in similar matters, the Karnataka High Court at Dharwad stays investigation into an FIR against BJP leader Dr Ravi Basalingappagowda Patil and others, till the next date of hearing. The FIR was registered over allegations of bulk Form 7 objections filed during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Belagavi. The allegations are untested, the Court has expressed no view on the merits, and the accused are presumed innocent [Dr. Ravi Basalingappagowda Patil v. State of Karnataka].
The interim order was passed by Justice Venkatesh Naik T on Tuesday, 13 October 2026, in CRL.P 102783/2026, with Senior Advocate Aruna Shyam appearing for the petitioner. The next hearing is on 29 October.
Parity with the Booth Level Agents’ cases
The Court placed reliance on the order of Justice Hegde in two writ petitions (W.P. Nos. 31887 and 31893 of 2026) filed by BJP Booth Level Agents G S Vasanthalakshmi and Deepak Singh R. Finding the facts here similar, it observed:
“In view of maintaining judicial discipline, it is just and proper to stay the investigation till the next date of hearing.”
Liberty has been given to the State to seek modification of the order if necessary.
The petitioner’s contentions
For Dr Patil, Ms Shyam contended that rival political parties were behind the FIR and that the law does not permit a parallel police investigation. According to her submission, the Election Commission notification allowed bulk Form 7 objections, the Electoral Registration Officer must adjudicate them first, and Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 could be invoked only after such adjudication, if a doubt remained. She added that similar FIRs had been registered across the State and that the proceedings were premature. These are the petitioner’s contentions, and the State’s submissions are not on record in the material available.
Form 7 and the Belagavi complaint
A Form 7 is the application through which a person objects to a name on the electoral roll and seeks its deletion. During the Special Intensive Revision, the electoral authorities examine such objections and verify them before any name is removed. The FIR traces back to a complaint lodged on 1 October 2026 at the Market Police Station, Belagavi, about an incident alleged to have taken place on 26 September.
As per the prosecution case, a Congress block agent alleged that Dr Patil and others planned to get voters of a particular community removed from the rolls by handing about 198 Form 7 applications to a Booth Level Officer in the election section of the Belagavi Mahanagar Palike, although those voters were still living at the addresses shown in the rolls. These allegations are untested.
The police booked Dr Patil under several provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, including Sections 318(4), 336(3), 336(4), 353, 61(2), 3(5), 3(7) and 192 read with 190, and issued him a notice under Section 35(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Earlier orders in the case
In the first week of October, a Belagavi Sessions Court (Judge Gangadhara K N) granted Dr Patil anticipatory bail in the FIR on a bond of Rs 50,000 with one surety for the same amount. It noted that the offences are non-bailable but do not carry death or life imprisonment, that a Form 7 application does not by itself lead to the deletion of a voter because the electoral authorities conduct their own verification, and that there was a gap between the date of the alleged incident and the complaint.
On 8 October the High Court directed the police not to take coercive steps against Dr Patil and two others. A day later, on 9 October, a coordinate Bench of Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde stayed the investigation in the cases of two BJP Booth Level Agents, since the competent authority had not yet decided the Form 7 applications.
From no coercive steps to a stay
With this order, the protection given to Dr Patil on 8 October, which barred coercive steps, becomes a stay of the investigation itself. It rests on judicial discipline and parity with the earlier order in the Booth Level Agents’ cases, not on a finding about the allegations, which remain untested and will be examined on 29 October. The common thread across these cases is a question of sequence: whether the police may investigate bulk Form 7 filings before the electoral authority has adjudicated the objections.
Case Details: Dr. Ravi Basalingappagowda Patil v. State of Karnataka | CRL.P 102783/2026 | Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench | Bench: Justice Venkatesh Naik T | Date of order: 13 October 2026 | Next date: 29 October 2026.
Appearances: Senior Advocate Aruna Shyam for the petitioner. Counsel for the State not stated.