The Karnataka High Court has refused to grant bail to four individuals accused of posting obscene, defamatory and threatening comments on social media targeting Vijayalakshmi, wife of Kannada actor Darshan, underscoring that digital platforms cannot be allowed to become spaces for harassment and character attacks.
In separate petitions, the accused challenged criminal proceedings initiated against them. However, Justice S. Rachaiah declined to extend bail, observing that the allegations revealed a disturbing misuse of social media.
The Court stressed that online platforms are meant to facilitate communication and exchange of ideas, not to serve as weapons for intimidation or public humiliation. It remarked that social media cannot be permitted to transform into an instrument for harassment and character assassination.
One of the accused, Chandrashekar B, was alleged to have operated an Instagram account under the name “Chandra Shekhar” and posted comments considered threatening and abusive. While examining the allegations, the Court noted that the language used against the complainant referred to sexual assault and reflected a deeply objectionable attitude towards women.
The Court reiterated that the constitutional guarantee of free speech is not absolute. While citizens enjoy the right to express themselves, that freedom remains subject to reasonable restrictions. Any expression that intrudes upon another person’s dignity, liberty or reputation can attract legal consequences.
Justice Rachaiah further observed that social media companies also bear responsibility for maintaining civility on their platforms. According to the Court, false, frivolous, abusive and intimidating content should ideally be regulated by the platforms themselves. Where such safeguards fail, courts are duty-bound to intervene to protect constitutional rights.
The bail plea of another accused, Nithin G.B., allegedly linked to the Instagram handle “nithin_gb_official,” was also rejected. The Court noted that social media, though intended for constructive interaction, is increasingly being misused by individuals who cross the boundaries of lawful expression.
In the case of Prashanth Kareepa Talavar, allegedly operating an Instagram account carrying a derogatory username, the Court took note of vulgar comments posted during promotional activities for the Kannada film The Devil in December 2025. The judge described the remarks as unacceptable and indicative of a troubling mindset towards women.
The fourth accused, Ningaraj Gulappa, allegedly used a Facebook account named “Prince Chinna” to publish derogatory remarks affecting the complainant’s personal dignity. The Court recorded that his mobile phone had been seized during the investigation and that preliminary material pointed towards his involvement.
Reaffirming the judiciary’s role in protecting individual rights, Justice Rachaiah observed that constitutional courts cannot remain passive when fundamental rights are threatened. Whenever required, courts will step in to safeguard the dignity, liberty and interests of citizens guaranteed under the Constitution.
With these observations, the High Court dismissed all four bail petitions.
