We Must Filter Out Disharmonious Things: Karnataka High Court Grants Interim Relief To MLA In FIR Over Comment On Inter-Religious Marriage

The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday (September 3) directed the police not to take any coercive steps against Vijayapura MLA Basangouda R Patil (Yatnal), booked in a FIR for allegedly making a controversial statement promising Rs. 5 Lakh to any Hindu youth who marries a Muslim woman.

Issuing notice on Yatnal's plea for quashing the FIR registered against him, Justice M I Arun in his interim order said:

“It is further submitted that even otherwise the punishment prescribed for the offence alleged against the petitioner is only three years. The petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the investigation. For the aforementioned reasons the following order is passed. Respondent no 1 (police) shall not initiate any coercive steps against the petitioner. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation.”

The petitioner had approached the court seeking quashing of the FIR registered under sections 299 (Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs), 196(Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony), 353(1) (C) and (2) (Statements conducing to public mischief) BNS. 

Advocate Venkatesh Dalwai appearing for Yatnal argued that the statement is made to promote religious harmony and there should be inter-religious marriages and not to offend any community.

However, respondent no 2 to 4 misunderstanding the statement have lodged the FIR's, he said. He further said that the Special Marriage Act, provides inter-religious marriages and thus no offence is made out against him.

The court issued notice to the state government and other respondents and passed the interim order. Dalwai pressed that the same relief be extended to other FIR as they are on the same facts. However, the court said in the final order it may consider the same.

After the hearing ended the court said,

“India is a diverse country. It is a country of diversity. It has a running history of 5,000 years. India is unique in the sense from Indus Valley civilization till there is an element of continuity. In the long history of this country it is natural that one community may have fought against the other, at the same time they would have loved one and helped one another. After independence what we are required to do is filter out those things which do not permit us to live together harmoniously. What we have to remove is discrimination.”

The court suggested to the petitioner that:

“What affects peaceful co-existence is that portion of the philosophy or that portion of the dictat or that portion of preaching which comes in the way of peaceful co-existence that you highlight and that you say is bad. People will accept. That is the need of the hour.”

Case Title: Basangouda R Patil (Yatna) AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WP 26787/2025

Appearance: Advocate Venkatesh Dalwai for Petitioner.