BENGALURU: Permitting proceedings against spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, founder of Art of Living Foundation, only on the score that he was named respondent in a public interest litigation concerning encroachment of government land, despite no iota of allegation against him, would become abuse of the process of law, the Karnataka High Court said.
Justice M Nagaprasanna passed the order, quashing the crime registered by Bengaluru Metropolitan Task Force (BMTF) on September 19, 2025, against Sri Sri Ravi Shankar.
Allowing his petition challenging the legality of the proceedings, the court stated that the complaint is based on three factors: public interest litigation, proceedings before the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Special Court and report of the tahsildar. “BMTF registered the crime, and there is no procedural aberration committed by it. At the same time, there is no allegation against the petitioner that can become the offence invoked against him.”
Therefore, interference of this court was warranted on the score that even if the complaint is taken on its face value, it does not make out an offence against the petitioner, as there is not even an iota of allegation against him in encroachment of government land, the court said.
BMTF registered a suo motu complaint under Section 192-A of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, on September 19, 2025, based on the report of the Bengaluru South tahsildar, before the court hearing the case of land grabbing, alleging that the petitioner and four others have encroached government land, lake and rajakaluve in Sy Nos. 160, 164/1, 164/2, 150, 137, 135 and 46 in Kaggalipura village, Uttarahalli hobli, Bengaluru South taluk. Therefore, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar moved the high court against it.
The court noted that perusal of the complaint would clearly indicate there is no allegation against the petitioner for land grabbing or encroachment of government land.
Merely because he was arrayed as respondent No.5 in the PIL, proceedings are drawn against him by dragging him into the web of proceedings. It cannot be registered without any prima facie material, which cannot be gathered during investigation. It must exist in the complaint, the court observed.