Karnataka High Court Halts Investigation Against Sri Sri Ravishankar in Land Case
The Karnataka High Court issued a stay on Tuesday, pausing the investigation against spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravishankar in a public land encroachment case. The Bangalore Metropolitan Task Force (BMTF) had registered the case, but the court's order will remain effective until the next hearing scheduled for January 21.
Court Questions Lack of Specific Allegations
Justice M Nagaprasanna observed that a preliminary reading of the complaint revealed no specific allegations directly targeting Sri Sri Ravishankar. The judge emphasized that without clear accusations, the petitioner should not be entangled in criminal proceedings.
"Without any allegations, the petitioner cannot be drawn into the web of crime, unless the special public prosecutor places material on record to show his direct involvement," Justice Nagaprasanna stated. "Therefore, the investigation shall remain stayed until the next date of hearing."
Background of the Case
Sri Sri Ravishankar, founder of the Art of Living Foundation, argued that the complaint originated from a 2023 public interest litigation (PIL). This PIL sought directions for the state to consider representations and demolish apartments allegedly encroaching on government land at Kaggalipura village in Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru South taluk.
His counsel, advocate P Prasanna Kumar, submitted that although Sri Sri Ravishankar was named as a respondent in the PIL, the BMTF complaint did not attribute any specific role or allegation to him regarding the alleged encroachment.
Arguments Presented by the Petitioner
The petitioner's legal team contended that the registration of the FIR and the continuation of the investigation, in the absence of specific allegations, constituted a gross abuse of law. They argued that the impugned FIR should be quashed against Sri Sri Ravishankar.
The court was informed that Sri Sri Ravishankar does not own any land in the relevant survey numbers at Kaggalipura, effectively ruling out any possibility of encroachment. Police notices reportedly showed land-grabbing allegations only against other accused individuals.
Furthermore, Sri Sri Ravishankar's name did not appear in the report submitted by the Bengaluru South tahsildar to the jurisdictional court. The petitioner asserted that the current case, which now includes his name as an accused based on the same tahsildar's report, reflects mala fide intent by authorities to tarnish his reputation.
Prosecution's Defense
Opposing the plea, special public prosecutor BA Belliappa defended the BMTF's actions. He stated that since Sri Sri Ravishankar was named as a respondent in the PIL, his inclusion in the complaint involved no procedural irregularity.
The High Court's decision to stay the investigation highlights the judicial scrutiny applied to cases lacking specific allegations. The matter will be revisited in the upcoming hearing on January 21.
