Sri H P Raviraj v. Station House Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION No. 14360 OF 2026 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN:

¶1SRI H P RAVIRAJ S/O MR PRAHALAD RAO AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS 'CHAYANAT' BUDNARU ROAD POST KUNJIBETTU-576 102. UDUPI

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI K CHANDRANATH ARIGA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

¶1STATION HOUSE OFFICER UDUPI CITY POLICE STATION UDUPI - 576 101.

¶2SUB - INSPECTOR OF POLICE UDUPI CITY POLICE STATION UDUPI - 576 101.

R1 AND R2 ARE REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI ADITHYA DIWAKAR, AGA)

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMMUNICATION DATED 28.04.2026 ISSUED BY THE R2 (ANNX-E) AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO PERMIT AND GIVEN PROTECTION TO THE CULTURAL PROTECTION ON

03.05.2026 (ANNX-C).

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

ORAL ORDER Despite sufficient time having been granted by this Court, the learned Additional Government Advocate is not in a position to secure instructions from the respondent– authorities. Be that as it may, this Court proceeds to examine the impugned endorsement at Annexure–E on the basis of the material available on record.

¶2A perusal of the impugned endorsement would indicate that respondent No.2 has declined to grant permission to the petitioner on the premise that the subject matter is seized of by this Court in W.P.No.29917/2024 and that an interim order of stay is operating. In the considered view of this Court, the said

reasoning is wholly misconceived and betrays a patent misreading of the interim order passed by this Court.

¶3The petitioner, who is presently functioning as the President of Udupi Taluka Kannada Sahithya Parishat, has sought permission to conduct a "Sahitya Sammelana" and a cultural procession scheduled to be held on

03.05.2026. The records would disclose that the writ petition in W.P.No.29917/2024 pertains to the issue relating to the petitioner's removal from the post of President. This Court, by an interim order, has stayed the operation of the removal, thereby permitting the petitioner to continue in office as President pending adjudication.

¶4In that view of the matter, the very foundation on which respondent No.2 has declined permission is untenable. The subsisting interim order operates in favour of the petitioner and not against him. Therefore, the reliance placed on the pendency of W.P.No.29917/2024

and the interim order passed therein to deny permission is clearly arbitrary and unsustainable in law.

¶5Having regard to the urgency of the matter, inasmuch as the cultural event is scheduled on

03.05.2026, this Court is of the considered view that immediate directions are warranted to subserve the ends of justice and to prevent frustration of the event on untenable administrative grounds.

¶6For the foregoing reasons, this court proceeds to pass the following; ORDER

(i) The writ petition is allowed.

(ii) The impugned endorsement/communication dated 28.04.2026 bearing Annexure–E issued by respondent No.2 is hereby quashed.

(iii) Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are hereby directed to forthwith grant necessary permission

and extend adequate police protection to the petitioner to enable conduct of the "Sahitya Sammelana" and the cultural procession scheduled on 03.05.2026.

(iv) The learned Additional Government Advocate is directed to forthwith communicate this order to respondent No.2, including through telephonic/electronic means, to ensure immediate compliance.

(v) It is made clear that the permission so granted shall be subject to reasonable regulatory conditions in the interest of public order and safety, without in any manner obstructing the scheduled event.

(vi) Ordered accordingly.

Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE

DKB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 64