BENGALURU: The Karnataka High Court on Thursday stayed the order issued by the state Home Department on May 27 to the Prosecution Department to withdraw eight criminal cases with serious charges booked by the Aland police in Kalaburagi district over the 2022 riots that occurred on a dargah premises.
A division bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice KS Hemalekha passed the interim order staying the impugned order challenged by advocate Girish Bharadwaj.
The petitioner alleged that the cabinet decided to withdraw the cases despite the prosecution department stating three times that there are sufficient materials to prove charges beyond a doubt.
It was alleged in the petition that the then Speaker of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly UT Khader requested the Home Department to withdraw the cases, in response to the representation submitted by the Managing Committee of Dhargha Hazrat MalikulMashaikh Makhdoom Ladle Ansari (Sunni).
Notice issued, order stayed till September 28
Issuing notice to the Departments of Home and Prosecution and Government Litigation, the court said that the impugned order is stayed till September 28, the next date of hearing.
The petitioner stated that in an identical situation earlier, the then Deputy Chief Minister interfered and recommended withdrawal of criminal cases and the same was challenged before the High Court in 2024. Though the Home and Prosecution Departments are parties to those proceedings, they have deliberately withdrawn the cases, violating the law declared by the high court in 2025.
It was stated in the petition that the notification was issued by the Home Department for withdrawal of 52 cases involving the offences affecting public order, public servants, communal harmony, public property, unlawful assembly, rioting, conspiracy, promoting enmity between two different groups on grounds of religion, race, attempt to murder, wrongful restraint, etc.
But the petitioner could secure only one notification with regard to Kalaburagi district, which is ultravires Section 321 of the CrPC, which specifically grants the authority to initiate any action for withdrawal from prosecution solely to public prosecutors by applying their minds independently. Therefore, the high court may secure all those notifications and find out whether other ministers have interfered with other withdrawals of cases and the same calls for judicial scrutiny, the petitioner pleaded.
