Karnataka High Court Quashes FIR Against 13 Over Posters Calling Supreme Court Verdict ‘Denial of Justice’
The Karnataka High Court has quashed an FIR against 13 people booked over Mangaluru posters calling a Supreme Court verdict 'denial of justice', holding that disagreeing with a ruling is legitimate dissent under Articles 19 and 21.
The Karnataka High Court has quashed a criminal case against 13 individuals who were booked for putting up roadside posters in Mangaluru describing a Supreme Court verdict as a "denial of justice" and urging people to raise their voice. Ruling in Mahammed Hanif & others v. State of Karnataka, Justice H.P. Sandesh held that expressing disagreement with a judicial decision is legitimate dissent and falls within the freedom of speech and personal liberty guaranteed under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The court found that continuing the prosecution would amount to an abuse of the process of law.
The bench said the posters only conveyed dissatisfaction with a verdict and did not incite hatred or violence. It observed:
"The same is dissent about the judgment and the same is not in the term of creating disharmony and only it is stated that justice is denied and raise voice and the same is within the scope of Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India." ‘Breakup Cannot Always Be Termed Abetment’: Supreme Court Quashes Case Over Woman’s Suicide After Lover Refused Marriage.
Court Sets Out Test For Section 153A IPC
On Section 153A of the IPC, the High Court said an act must be judged by its likely effect on reasonable, ordinary persons in significant numbers. The subjective reaction of a few individuals developing ill will, it clarified, is not enough to establish the offence.
The court concluded that the material on record did not disclose the essential ingredients of Sections 153A and 295A of the IPC. It then quashed the case and all pending proceedings against the 13 petitioners. Supreme Court Quashes Over 80 Cases To End ‘Matrimonial Battle of Mahabharata’ Between Couple, Orders Husband To Pay INR 5 Crore Alimony.
What Was The Case About
The case goes back to 2019, when a complaint alleged that roadside walls in Mangaluru had been pasted with posters calling a Supreme Court judgment a "denial of justice" and asking citizens to speak out. The complaint also claimed the posters were put up by members linked to the Popular Front of India (PFI).
Police registered an FIR under Section 153A (promoting enmity between groups), Section 295A (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings) and Section 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the IPC. They also invoked Section 3 of the Karnataka Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act.
In 2021, the accused moved the High Court, arguing that the posters did not meet the legal threshold for the alleged offences and only reflected protected political and judicial dissent.
State Cited Risk Of Public Disharmony
The State opposed the petition, arguing that displaying such posters at prominent public places right after the Supreme Court pronounced its verdict risked public disharmony and unrest. State counsel said the timing and nature of the displays justified penal action to prevent a possible breach of peace. The High Court did not accept this and ruled in favour of the petitioners.
(The above story first appeared on LatestLY on Oct 23, 2026 03:27 PM IST. For more news and updates on politics, world, sports, entertainment and lifestyle, log on to our website latestly.com).
