Background of the Case

The Karnataka High Court, by order dated 28 October 2026, quashed criminal proceedings initiated against D.S. Ravi Kumar in connection with allegations that 'Pakistan Zindabad' slogans were raised during a political demonstration held in Mandya on 18 December 2022.

The proceedings originated from a complaint lodged by Kannambadi Kumar at Mandya West Police Station. Based on the complaint, the police registered Crime No. 30/2024 for offences punishable under Sections 153B and 505(1)(b) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

According to the complaint, a group of persons associated with the Bharatiya Janata Party had organised a protest during which participants allegedly raised slogans of 'Pakistan Zindabad'. The complainant claimed that he was mentally disturbed after watching a video of the incident and sought action against those responsible.

Following the investigation, a charge sheet was filed and proceedings were initiated in C.C. No. 712/2024 before the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mandya.

Arguments of the Petitioner

D.S. Ravi Kumar approached the High Court seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings, contending that the alleged slogan was not raised intentionally.

His counsel submitted that the demonstration had been organised by BJP supporters and that the alleged expression was merely a slip of the tongue during the protest. According to the petitioner, the participants intended to raise the slogan 'Pakistan Murdabad', but the word 'Zindabad' was inadvertently used instead.

It was further contended that there was no intention to create public unrest, promote hostility against any community or disturb public order. Consequently, continuation of the criminal proceedings was argued to be an abuse of the process of law.

Arguments of the State

Opposing the petition, the High Court Government Pleader submitted that the video clip produced by the complainant clearly contained the alleged slogan.

The State also relied upon the charge sheet, particularly its 17th column, which referred to a demonstration organised in response to an objectionable statement made by the Foreign Minister of Pakistan.

According to the prosecution, the petitioner had deliberately raised the slogan during the demonstration with the intention of creating unrest in society. The State therefore sought dismissal of the petition and continuation of the criminal trial.

High Court's Observations

Justice V. Srishananda examined the circumstances surrounding the demonstration, the allegations in the complaint and the material collected during the investigation.

The Court observed that it was highly improbable that participants in a demonstration organised by the Bharatiya Janata Party would raise a slogan supporting Pakistan. In that context, the Court considered the petitioner's explanation that the word 'Zindabad' had been used inadvertently instead of 'Murdabad'.

The Court also took note of the considerable delay in initiating the criminal proceedings. Although the alleged incident had taken place on 18 December 2022, the complaint was lodged nearly two years later, on the basis of a video circulated through a YouTube channel.

Importantly, the investigation had failed to establish who had participated in the demonstration or what consequences the alleged slogans had produced in society.

The investigating agency had not gathered material demonstrating that the incident had resulted in unrest within any particular community or among the general public.

The Court considered these deficiencies relevant while examining whether the criminal proceedings could legitimately continue.

Absence of Prior Sanction Under Section 196 CrPC

Another important ground for quashing the proceedings was the absence of prior government sanction for prosecuting the offence under Section 505 IPC.

The Court referred to its earlier decision in K.M. Basha alias Mehaboob Basha v. State of Karnataka, decided in Criminal Petition No. 201668/2022.

In that case, the High Court had considered the requirement of prior sanction under Section 196(1A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) before a court could take cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 505 IPC.

Applying the same legal principle, the Court observed that no such prior sanction had been obtained in the present case, even though the Magistrate had taken cognizance of the alleged offence.

Thus, the absence of the mandatory sanction constituted an additional legal defect in the criminal proceedings.

Relevant Extract from the Judgment

While examining the circumstances of the demonstration, the High Court observed:

"At the outset, in a demonstration organized by the Bharathiya Janatha Party-a Political Party, It is highly unimaginable that the protesters therein would raise the slogan 'Pakistan Zindabad'."

On the absence of the necessary statutory ingredients and prior sanction, the Court further held:

"Therefore, on one hand, ingredients of Section 153 being not attracted, and on the other hand, prior sanction is not obtained for offence under Section 505 of IPC, this Court is constrained to quash the pending criminal proceedings."

These observations formed the basis of the Court's decision to terminate the prosecution against the petitioner.

Final Decision

The Karnataka High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the criminal proceedings pending in C.C. No. 712/2024 before the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mandya, insofar as D.S. Ravi Kumar was concerned.

The proceedings arose from Crime No. 30/2024 registered by Mandya West Police Station.

The Court concluded that the ingredients of the alleged offence under Section 153B were not attracted, referring to Section 153 in its concluding reasoning, and that the prosecution under Section 505 IPC could not continue without the requisite prior sanction under Section 196(1A) CrPC.

The decision highlights the importance of establishing the essential ingredients of an alleged criminal offence through proper investigation and complying with mandatory statutory requirements before initiating prosecution.

The ruling, however, is based on the particular facts and investigative deficiencies in this case and should not be understood as a general determination that raising any particular slogan is incapable of attracting criminal liability.

Case Details

Case Name: D.S. Ravi Kumar v. State of Karnataka & Others

Court: High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru

Date of Decision: 28 October 2026

Case Number: W.P. No. 20693 of 2024 (GM-RES)

Coram/Judge: Justice V. Srishananda