Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Karnataka State Road Transport ... vs The Chief Secretary on 22 April, 2026

                                        -1-
                                                    NC: 2026:KHC:21995
                                               WP No. 12716 of 2026


             HC-KAR




                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                      DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2026

                                     BEFORE
             THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
                    WRIT PETITION NO. 12716 OF 2026 (GM-RES)
             BETWEEN:

             KARNATAKA STATE ROAD
             TRANSPORT EMPLOYEES LEAGUE (R),
             A REGISTERED TRADE UNION UNDER
             THE TRADE UNIONS ACT, 1926,
             HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.54,
             6TH CROSS, NEAR POLICE STATION,
             WILSON GARDEN, BANGALORE - 560 027
             REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT,
             SRI. CHANDRA SHEKAR R
             S/O RAMREDDY,
             AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS.
                                                         ...PETITIONER
             (BY SRI. NATARAJ SHARMA S, ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by
             AND:
CHAITHRA A
Location:
HIGH         1.    THE CHIEF SECRETARY
COURT OF           GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
KARNATAKA
                   ROOM NO.320, 3RD FLOOR,
                   VIDHANA SOUDA
                   BANGALORE - 560 001.

             2.    THE SECRETARY,
                   DEPARTMENT OF HOME
                   ROOM NO.222, 2ND FLOOR,
                   VIDHANA SOUDA,
                             -2-
                                        NC: 2026:KHC:21995
                                      WP No. 12716 of 2026


HC-KAR




     BANGALORE - 560 001.

3.   THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
     POLICE CENTRAL OFFICE,
     NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
     BANGALORE - 560 001.

4.   THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
     INFANTRY ROAD, BANGALORE CITY,
     BANGALORE - 560 001.

5.   THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
     UPPARPET POLICE STATION
     UPPARPET, BANGALORE - 560 009.

6.   THE SECRETARY
     DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT,
     3RD BLOCK, MS BUILDING,
     DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD,
     BANGALORE - 560 001.

7.   THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
     KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
     CORPORATION, CENTRAL OFFICE,
     K.H. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 027.
                                           ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. KIRAN ROA, AAG A/W
    SRI. ADITYA DIWAKAR, AGA)

     THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) ISSUE A WRIT
OF MANDAMUS, ORDER OR DIRECTION DIRECTING THE
RESPONDENTS NO.3 TO 5, TO PERMIT THE PETITIONER AND
ITS MEMBERS TO CONDUCT A PEACEFUL PROTEST AND
INDEFINITE HUNGER STRIKE AT FREEDOM PARK, BENGALURU,
                               -3-
                                             NC: 2026:KHC:21995
                                         WP No. 12716 of 2026


HC-KAR




FROM 21.04.2026 OR ON SUCH OTHER DATE AS THIS HON'BLE
COURT DEEMS FIT AND ETC.,

    THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM


                        ORAL ORDER

The captioned writ petition is instituted calling in question the legality and correctness of the endorsement issued by respondent No.5, whereby the request of the petitioner- association seeking permission to conduct a peaceful protest and to undertake an indefinite hunger strike at Freedom Park, Bengaluru, from 24.04.2026 or on any other suitable date, has been declined. The petitioner has also sought issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent Nos.3 to 5 to accord necessary permission to hold such protest.

2. Learned AGA appearing for the State, on instructions, has placed on record a memo enclosing the impugned endorsement issued by the Commissioner of Police as well as a copy of the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.5781/2021. Placing reliance on the said materials, it is contended that the application submitted by the petitioner is -4- NC: 2026:KHC:21995 WP No. 12716 of 2026 HC-KAR fundamentally defective and does not conform to the statutory framework governing grant of permission for protests. It is further submitted that in view of the binding regulatory regime now in force, namely, the Licensing and Regulation of Protests, Demonstrations and Protest Marches (Bengaluru City) Order, 2021 (for short, "Rules, 2021"), any application seeking permission to hold a protest is required to strictly adhere to the prescribed procedure, including submission of requisite forms in Form Nos.1 to 4. It is thus contended that the rejection of the petitioner's application is justified and that the petitioner, if so advised, may either assail the endorsement in appropriate proceedings or submit a fresh application in strict compliance with the Rules, 2021.

3. This Court has given its anxious consideration to the rival submissions and has perused the material on record. A careful examination of the writ papers would indicate that the petitioner seeks permission not merely for a regulated protest, but for an indefinite hunger strike at a notified public place. Such a prayer, on the face of it, runs contrary to the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Amit Sahni -5- NC: 2026:KHC:21995 WP No. 12716 of 2026 HC-KAR (Shaheen Bagh) v. Commissioner of Police 2020 (10) SCC 573, wherein it is authoritatively held that while the right to protest is a fundamental right in a democratic polity, the same is subject to reasonable restrictions and cannot extend to indefinite occupation of public spaces causing inconvenience to the general public.

4. In the light of the aforesaid enunciation of law and having regard to the regulatory framework now brought into force under the Rules, 2021, which mandates strict compliance with procedural requirements including submission of applications in prescribed Forms Nos.1 to 4, this Court is of the considered view that the prayer sought in the present petition cannot be countenanced. The endorsement impugned is thus in consonance with the governing statutory scheme and does not warrant interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

5. However, it is made clear that the rejection of the present writ petition shall not foreclose the petitioner's right to seek permission afresh. Liberty deserves to be reserved to the petitioner to submit a fresh application strictly in compliance -6- NC: 2026:KHC:21995 WP No. 12716 of 2026 HC-KAR with the Rules, 2021, in which event the competent authority shall consider the same in accordance with law, bearing in mind the parameters laid down therein.

6. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following:

ORDER i. The writ petition stands dismissed;
ii. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner- association to submit a fresh application seeking permission to conduct protest/demonstration strictly in compliance with the Licensing and Regulation of Protests, Demonstrations and Protest Marches (Bengaluru City) Order, 2021;
iii. If such an application is submitted, the competent authority shall consider and dispose of the same expeditiously, strictly in accordance with law and in the light of the observations made herein.
Sd/-
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE HDK/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29