Karnataka High Court junks PIL alleging hate speech by BJP leaders, right-wing activists

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday dismissed an 'omnibus' public interest litigation (PIL) petition seeking action for hate speech allegedly made by several Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leaders and right wing activists [Mohammed Khaleelulla v. State of Karnataka and ors]..The petition filed in 2022 had sought action against BJP leaders KS Eshwarappa, P Renukacharya, CT Ravi, Pratapsimha, Basanagouda R Patil, Shobha Karandlaje and Tejasvi Surya as well as right wing activists, Sulibele Chakravarthy, Pramodh Muthalik (Rashtriya Hindu Sena chief) and Rishi Kumaraswamy.Appearing for the petitioner, advocate Mohamad Anwar told the Court that these persons have been trying to create disharmony between religious communities.A Bench of Chief Justice NV Anjaria and Justice KV Aravind, however, dismissed the petition after finding that it was omnibus and appeared to be ill motivated. "On carefully going through the petition, the petition is too general to be countenanced. The allegations lack authentication. Even otherwise, petition of such nature cannot be entertained as a Public Interest Litigation. The filing of the petition smacks of motive other than public interest. The petitions filed in the nature of public interest litigation with political or communal motive cannot be entertained," the Court said. The Bench added that although the petition was liable to be dismissed with costs, the Court is refraining from doing so. .During the hearing today, Chief Justice Anjaria criticised the petitioner for failing to properly disclosed his credentials or his profession."We don't know about your client. Who has drafted the petition? Why you are misusing platform of the High Court by filing such petitions? What do you want? You alleging some hate speech against some particular communities. First you disclose what you are in life, how you are connected with these persons, what is the motive for filing these petitions," Chief Justice Anjaria said. The petitioner's counsel eventually informed the Court that the petitioner was a civil contractor and a social activist. However, the Bench was unimpressed."Civil contractor filed such an uncivil petition ... This is total misuse of the court process," the Court remarked. Given the omnibus nature of the allegations, the Court expressed that it was inclined to dismiss the petition.The petitioner's counsel, in response, urged the Bench to either adjourn or pass over the matter since his senior was unavailable to argue. The Court flatly refused the request and questioned why such a frivolous petition was filed at all. "Why such omnibus petitions that too in Public Interest Petition. Is the High Court meant for such petitions? So what do you propose - you are inviting order or withdrawing?" Chief Justice Anjaria asked. The Chief Justice added that if the petitioner was offended by any statement, he could still file a defamation complaint or avail another appropriate remedy. "We are not concerned with all this; you file defamation complaint, whatever you want to file. What kind of petition is this? You can't invoke such a matter for public interest ... Are you withdrawing? Last chance," the Chief Justice warned. The lawyer persisted and drew the attention of the Bench to guidelines issued by the Supreme Court in the case of Tehseen Poonwalla v. Union of India to curb fake news, hate speech and mob lynching. The Court proceeded to record the lawyer's submission on this aspect as well in its order before dismissing the petition summarily.