Karnataka High Court Quashes Case Against Sri Ram Sene's Pramod Muthalik For Delivering Allegedly 'Provocative Speech' On Cow Slaughter

The Karnataka High Court has quashed proceedings initiated in the year 2017, under Section 153A and Section 295(A) of the Indian Penal Code, against the Founder President of Sri. Ram Sene, Pramod Mutalik for allegedly making provocative statements while addressing a public gathering.

A single judge bench of Justice Hemant Chandangoudar sitting at Kalaburagi quashed the proceedings stating, “Section 196 of Cr.P.C. specifies that no Court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 153-A of IPC and Section 295-A of IPC, except the previous sanction of the State Government. In the instant case, the learned Magistrate has taken the cognizance for the aforesaid offences without there being previous sanction by the State Government. Hence, in the absence of previous sanction, the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate for the above said offences, is one without authority of law.”

As per the chargesheet filed by the police, on 25.02.2017, when Shivaji Maharaj Jayanti was being celebrated and also the inauguration of office of the Sri. Ram Sene, the accused was the Chief Guest. In the presence of Police Sub Inspector i.e., complainant and 3 constables, the accused allegedly made certain provocative remarks while addressing the gathering. He allegedly said those who kill the cow, their hands must be cut.

The Magistrate after accepting the charge-sheet took cognizance of the aforesaid offences and issued summons.

Seeking quashing, the petitioner-accused argued that the cognizance taken by the Magistrate for the aforesaid offences, in the absence of sanction as specified under Section 196 of Cr.P.C. is one without authority of law. Moreover, it was argued that statements of the independent witnesses have not been recorded and in the absence of any material to substantiate the allegations against the accused, the charge-sheet filed on the basis of the statement of the police witnesses and is without any substance.

Prosecution opposed the plea. However, as the bench perused the chargesheet it said “Except the statements of the police personnel, the statements of independent eyewitnesses have not been recorded. Though the statement of the person who is alleged to have videographed the function is recorded, no data is retrieved from the video camera to substantiate that the accused has made inflammatory statements.”

Accordingly, the Court quashed the proceedings.

Case Title: Pramod Mutalik And State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200528 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 238

Date of Order: 14-06-2023

Appearance: Advocate Kadloor Satyanarayanacharya for petitioner.

HCGP Guruaj V Hasilkar for Respondent

Click Here To Read/Download Order