The Karnataka High Court has declined to shut down a criminal case linked to the circulation of deeply offensive images of Hindu deities and certain political figures on a WhatsApp group, making it clear that the right to free speech does not stretch to content that wounds religious sentiment or threatens communal harmony.
The case stems from activity on a WhatsApp group titled “Bajarangi Go Kallaru”, where objectionable visuals were allegedly shared repeatedly. A man accused of circulating the material had approached the High Court seeking to quash the FIR against him, arguing that the investigation itself was flawed and premature.
The Court was unconvinced. After examining the investigation records, it observed that the images in question were so crude and demeaning that even reproducing them in a judicial order would be inappropriate. On the face of it, the material appeared capable of outraging religious feelings and unsettling public harmony—enough, the Court held, to justify a full-fledged trial rather than an early dismissal.
Whether the accused acted with deliberate intent, the Court clarified, is a question best left to the trial court after evidence is tested. At this stage, it said, stepping in to terminate the proceedings would be neither prudent nor justified.
The Court also addressed concerns about selective investigation, noting that not all administrators of the WhatsApp group had been proceeded against. While this uneven approach was flagged with some unease, the Court held that it could not become a shield for the petitioner. If the investigation later reveals the involvement of other members or administrators, it said, they too must face the law.
Crucially, the ruling reinforced a familiar constitutional boundary: freedom of speech is not absolute. Even if provocative or insulting content does not immediately trigger violence or unrest, material with the inherent potential to disrupt public order can still fall outside constitutional protection.
The case traces back to 2021, when a complainant claimed he was added to the WhatsApp group through an unknown link and soon encountered repeated posts that he found offensive to religious beliefs. The police registered a case under provisions dealing with outraging religious feelings and the online transmission of obscene material.
The accused, arrested that year, moved the High Court in 2024 seeking to halt the investigation. One of the arguments raised was that prior government approval was required before such a case could even be investigated. The Court rejected this outright, pointing out that any such requirement applies later, not at the investigation stage.
While dismissing the plea, the High Court directed the authorities to wrap up the long-pending probe without further delay, noting that the case has already lingered for several years.
In essence, the message was blunt: invoking free speech cannot be a license to offend, provoke, or degrade—and courts will be slow to intervene when allegations strike at the core of communal sensitivity.
