Protest march case: SC stays proceedings against Karnataka CM Siddaramaiah, others

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday stayed criminal proceedings initiated against Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah and others for a protest march organised on February 14, 2022, in Bengaluru.

A bench comprising Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Prashant Kumar Mishra issued notice to the Karnataka government on a plea filed by Siddaramaiah and others, including ministerial colleagues M B Patil and Ramalinga Reddy, as well as Congress leader Randeep Singh Surjewala.

Senior advocates Kapil Sibal, A M Singhvi, and Sidharth Luthra, representing the petitioners, argued that in a democracy, the rights to freedom of speech and protest are paramount.

The advocates argued that the right to assemble and protest should only be restricted when public order is impacted.

"Political protests against the ruling dispensation, conducted peacefully and without criminal intent, should not be suppressed," they asserted.

The court has requested a response from the state government within six weeks. Additionally, it stayed the Karnataka High Court's order from February 6, 2024, which declined to quash the proceedings in the matter, imposing a cost of Rs 10,000.

During the hearing, Singhvi cited several past cases involving politicians such as Prakash Karat, Senthil Balaji, Nishikant Dubey, and others, which were quashed by the High Courts.

However, the bench responded, "Your argument implies that if the protest is carried out by politicians, it must be quashed."

The bench further remarked, "Did you seek permission before the demonstration? You cannot claim one fine morning that, since you are a politician, you should be allowed to obstruct the traffic."

At that juncture, the court advised the counsel that the petitioners should proceed to face the trial.

However, after the counsel submitted holding the demonstration per se can't be considered a criminal act, the court decided to examine the matter.

In his plea, the Karnataka Chief Minister argued that none of the essential elements of the alleged offences were established. The ongoing proceedings are merely an abuse of the legal process and would result in undue harassment based on vague allegations, the plea claimed.

"The incident complained lasted for almost an hour and no violent action or use of criminal force has been alleged against any of the members of the procession, it is thus submitted that the prosecution cannot be allowed to continue on such frivolous incidents where no allegation of criminality has been attributed to any of the members of the assembly," his plea stated.

The High Court, however, failed to ascertain whether the prosecution of the petitioner would be legitimate the given facts and circumstances, it contended.

The plea also contended that the HC lost sight of the fact that the assembly did not lead to any violence or use of criminal force to present an imminent threat to the public at large or to the members of the then ruling dispensation, or any public servant.

The protest march was organised to seek the resignation of then Minister K S Eshwarappa following the death of a civil contractor, alleging that commission was demanded.