Bengaluru, May 29, 2025 — In a significant decision, the Karnataka High Court has set aside the Congress-led State government’s directive to withdraw 43 criminal cases, including those related to the 2022 Hubballi riots, farmer protests, and Kannada activism.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice NV Anjaria and Justice KV Aravind delivered the judgment in a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by lawyer Girish Bharadwaj, challenging the legality of the State’s October 2024 Government Order (GO) instructing public prosecutors to seek withdrawal of the cases under Section 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
“GO is set aside. It is declared that the order shall stand non est from inception. Consequences in law will follow,” the Court ruled, effectively nullifying the State’s directive.
Chief Justice NV Anjaria’s Final Pronouncement
The ruling was notably delivered on Chief Justice Anjaria’s final day at the Karnataka High Court, ahead of his elevation to the Supreme Court. In a heartfelt farewell, he remarked:
“This is my last sitting, last pronouncement, last orders in the High Court. I thank you from the bottom of my heart — all lawyers, all staff.”
Petitioner’s Argument: Prosecutors Not Post Offices
The petitioner argued that the State government had overstepped its authority by directing prosecutors to withdraw criminal cases — a decision that legally rests with the public prosecutor’s independent judgment under Section 321 CrPC.
Appearing for the petitioner, Advocate Venkatesh Dalwai cited Supreme Court precedents, stating:
“The prosecutor’s office is not expected to act as a post office. The State cannot pressure them to withdraw prosecutions.”
He also noted that both the Law Department and the Prosecution Department had opined against withdrawal, yet the State’s Home Department issued the withdrawal directive.
Serious Charges and Political Links
The 43 cases included serious criminal charges such as:
- Rioting
- Attempt to murder
- Attacks on police officers
- Criminal trespass
Prominently among them were cases stemming from the Hubballi riots, where mobs allegedly attacked a police station following a protest over a provocative social media post. The violence involved destruction of public property and injuries to officers.
The petition also pointed to a potential political motivation, asserting that several of the 43 cases involved influential political figures, including former ministers, MLAs, and leaders of powerful organizations.
“The 43 cases proposed are of highly influential personalities… indicating ulterior motives behind the proposal,” the petition filed by Advocate Shridhar Prabhu of Nayana Law stated.
What This Means
This ruling reinforces the independence of public prosecutors and affirms judicial scrutiny over politically sensitive decisions that may compromise legal due process. The verdict may also set a precedent in challenging blanket withdrawals of criminal cases by governments on political or populist grounds.
