Karnataka High Court Strikes Down FIR Against Journalist Rahul Shivashankar Over Tweet on Religious Minorities Fund Allocation
(Judicial Quest News Network)
On Monday, March 17, the Karnataka High Court ruled in Favor of TV journalist Rahul Shivshankar, allowing his petition to quash an FIR registered against him over a tweet regarding the state government’s allocation of funds for the welfare of religious minorities. The Court found merit in Shivshankar’s argument, ultimately dismissing the charges against him.
Justice M. NagaPrasanna, while delivering the judgment, stated that the petition had been allowed and the FIR against Shivshankar was quashed.
The case stemmed from a tweet made by Shivshankar on February 13, in which he questioned the state government’s budgetary allocation for religious minority welfare. During the hearing, Shivshankar’s lawyer, Advocate Bipin Hegde, contended that the journalist had not made any false statements in his tweet. Hegde clarified that the information contained in the budget was accurately represented in Shivshankar’s tweet, thus refuting any claims of misinformation.
Shivshankar had expressed concerns over the disparity in fund allocation between religious institutions, specifically asking why temples, which generate substantial revenue for the state, were excluded from funding, while other religious places of worship received significant financial support. The tweet garnered attention and sparked debate over the state’s priorities in allocating funds for religious institutions.
The state government, represented by Additional Special Public Prosecutor B.N. Jagadisha, had argued that Shivshankar’s tweet was false and inflammatory. Jagadisha contended that the journalist’s remarks were intended to create disharmony between different religious groups. As a result, an FIR was filed under sections 153A and 505 of the Indian Penal Code, which pertain to promoting enmity and causing public mischief.
The complaint against Shivshankar had been lodged by a Kolar councillor, who accused the journalist of making a sarcastic remark regarding the allocation of funds for the development of religious properties in Mangalore and Christian places of worship. The councillor claimed that such statements had the potential to incite religious tensions.
In his defense, Shivshankar maintained that his tweet was based on factual information and that the premise of the FIR was flawed. He argued that the tweet was aimed at raising public awareness about the budget allocation, not at spreading falsehoods or promoting animosity between religious groups. His legal team further stated that questions raised about the allocation of funds should not be misconstrued as attempts to incite hatred. The petition emphasized that such inquiries were an essential part of journalistic responsibility and should not be viewed as criminal conduct.
Shivshankar’s legal counsel stressed that if questions on sensitive issues such as religion could be seen as promoting disharmony, it would create a chilling effect, making it impossible for journalists or the public to ask legitimate questions on matters of public interest.
In light of these arguments, the Karnataka High Court ruled that there was no basis for the charges and quashed the FIR against Rahul Shivshankar, affirming that freedom of expression, particularly in matters of public interest, should be protected.
Advocate Abhishek Kumar appeared on behalf of the petitioner and Advocate B.N.Jagdesh represented the Criminal Investigation Department
