Karnataka High Court stays "counterblast" FIR against four lawyers who protested police attack on advocate

The Karnataka High Court on Monday stayed a criminal case filed against four lawyers for allegedly threatening a Chikmagalur police officer and obstructing his duty in the wake of protests against an attack on another advocate. .Justice Hemant Chandangoudar issued notice to the concerned police officer and temporarily stayed the first information report (FIR) proceedings against the lawyers.The plea was filed by advocates DB Sujendra, AK Bhuvanesh, KB Nandish and HM Sudhakar (petitioners). Pertinently, the petitioners have asserted that the FIR against them was a "counterblast" to the criminal case initiated against police officers for allegedly beating up a young advocate in Chikmagalur over a traffic violation. .The plea stated that on November 30, an advocate, NT Preetham was confronted by the police shortly after he parked his bike at the Chikkamagaluru police station. A police officer is said to have taken advocate Preetham's bike key and accused him of violating traffic rules. The plea added that even though Preetham expressed his willingness to pay the fine, the police took him to the police station where he was assaulted by several officers, including with a bat. It was further claimed that despite sustaining serious injuries, Preetham was not initially admitted to a hospital..After receiving information about this attack, several lawyers headed to the police station to protest against the assault of advocate Preetham, In the wake of such protests, and on the basis of a letter by the Advocates Association of Bengaluru, the Karnataka High Court also took suo motu cognisance of the matter last week. However, the petitioner-lawyers submitted that the police have now filed a criminal case against the protesting lawyers, simply to harass them and as a counterblast to the above developments. .The complaint was filed by a police officer, AM Satish, who claimed that his mobile phone was confiscated, an attempt was made to assault him, that he was prevented from doing his duty, threatened, and that there was public disturbance incited. The complainant-police officer alleged that this happened when he went to record the statement of advocate Preetham..However, the accused lawyers have countered that it is a false case meant only to to demoralise the spirit of the advocates. The petitioners added that while the alleged incidents were said to have taken place on November 30, the complaint was filed only on December 3, after a delay of three days. It is also argued that the allegations are frivolous, baseless and not sustainable in the eyes of law. .The criminal case was registered only with the malicious intention of implicating protesting advocates, who are office bearers of the Chikkamangaluru Bar Associations, the plea stated. As such, the High Court has been urged to quash the FIR registered against the lawyers under Sections 353 (causing hurt), 504 (intentional insult), 506 (criminal intimidation) and 149 (unlawful assembly) of the Indian Penal Code. The petition was filed through advocate Girish B Baladare..[Read Order]