One Facebook poster, one charge under Section 353(2) of the BNS, and a trial the Karnataka High Court has now said cannot go on: the Court has quashed criminal proceedings against a Shivamogga man booked for sharing a morphed image of Rahul Gandhi with a Pakistan Army officer, holding that letting the trial continue would be an abuse of the process of law.
Bengaluru: A Facebook poster showing half the face of Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi and half the face of a Pakistan Army officer, with the tagline “one agenda”, will not now go to trial, the Karnataka High Court having quashed the case under Section 353(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) against the man who shared it and ruled that the facts did not justify a trial [Sri G. Nagesh alias Rajesha Hirimane v. State of Karnataka and Another].
Justice M. Nagaprasanna allowed the writ petition filed by G. Nagesh alias Rajesha Hirimane, 51, a resident of Malali village in Hosanagara taluk, Shivamogga district. The petition was heard and reserved on September 2, 2026 and the CAV order was pronounced on November 4, 2026.
Why the Court stopped the trial
The case lay “in a narrow compass”, the Court noted, as it concerned the forwarding of a social media post, and it examined whether the complaint and the charge sheet made out an offence. It said the interpretation of Section 353(2) BNS, or Section 153-A of the earlier Indian Penal Code, “need not detain this court for long”, and turned to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Imran Pratapgadhi v. State of Gujarat (2025).
The High Court extracted the Supreme Court’s observation that police officers dealing with offences based on spoken or written words must keep in mind the fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a), and the standard drawn from the Nagpur High Court’s decision in Bhagwati Charan Shukla, which said words must be judged by the standards of:
“reasonable, strong-minded, firm and courageous men, and not those of weak and vacillating minds, nor of those who scent danger in every hostile point of view.”
Applying those principles, Justice Nagaprasanna concluded:
“If the facts obtaining in the case at hand are considered on the bedrock of the principles laid down by the Apex Court, permitting further trial in the case at hand would become an abuse of the process of law and result in miscarriage of justice.”
ALSO READ: Karnataka High Court Quashes FIR Against Amit Malviya Over X Post On Rahul Gandhi
The outcome
The writ petition was allowed. The proceedings in C.C. No. 2891 of 2025 pending before the Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division) and JMFC, Hosanagara, and the Deputy Commissioner’s order dated November 14, 2025, were quashed. Pending applications were disposed of.
The post and the prosecution
According to the prosecution, on May 20, 2025 the petitioner shared a poster depicting one half of the face of Rahul Gandhi and the other half of the face of an officer in Pakistan Army uniform bearing the nameplate “ASIM”, with the tagline “one agenda”. A complaint was registered at the instance of the Deputy Commissioner, Shivamogga District, alleging that the poster was capable of generating enmity, hatred and ill-will among communities and regional groups.
Crime No. 25 of 2025 was registered at Nagara police station under Section 353(2) BNS. The Deputy Commissioner granted sanction on November 14, 2025, the police filed a charge sheet, and the Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division) and JMFC, Hosanagara took cognizance on December 1, 2025, registering C.C. No. 2891 of 2025. The petitioner then approached the High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), seeking to quash the proceedings and the sanction order.
What each side argued
Senior Advocate M. Aruna Shyam, for the petitioner, argued that his client was not the creator of the image and had only shared it, and that even otherwise the allegations did not make out an offence under Section 353(2) BNS. He relied on several Supreme Court rulings.
State Public Prosecutor-I B.N. Jagadeesha opposed the plea, contending that the petitioner was prima facie guilty of promoting ill-will among communities and should come out clean in a full-blown trial. He urged the Court not to extend its protective hand in the facts of the case.
Why the order matters
The order applies the Supreme Court’s Imran Pratapgadhi standard to a political social media post under the BNS provision that replaced Section 153-A of the IPC. It reinforces that criminal law on promoting enmity is to be tested against the reaction of a reasonable, firm-minded person, and that a forwarded post, however provocative or politically charged, does not automatically warrant a trial. Political posts about leaders of every party continue to reach courts, and this ruling adds to a growing line of orders asking police and sanctioning authorities to weigh Article 19(1)(a) before setting the criminal process in motion.
Case Title: Sri G. Nagesh alias Rajesha Hirimane v. State of Karnataka and Another
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 21084 of 2026 (GM-RES)
Bench: Justice M. Nagaprasanna, High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru
Date of Order: November 4, 2026 (reserved on September 2, 2026)
Appearances: Senior Advocate M. Aruna Shyam with Advocate Suyog Herele E. for the petitioner; State Public Prosecutor-I B.N. Jagadeesha for the respondents
