Supreme Court Refuses To Gag Media In Dharmasthala Mass Burial Case
Today, the Supreme Court refused to pass any gag order in the matter as it will “stifle free speech” and further directed the trial court to consider the matter afresh.
The matter came into controversy after a former sanitation worker alleged that he was compelled under mortal threat to clandestinely bury a multitude of human remains over a span of nearly two decades within the sacred precincts of Dharmasthala. The period was between 1995 to 2014.
The Bench of Justice rajesh bindal and Justice Manmohan refused to pass a gag order in Dharamasthala mass burial case in favour of the Petitioners who alleged that their reputation is at stake due to defamatory contents being published on news channels and social media.
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohtgappearing for the Petitioner, submitted that a former sanitation worker made a statement to the Police that skeletons are buried in the Temple area concerned and accordingly an FIR was registered.
Further, Rohatgi emphasised the depiction of the Petitioner and his brother by the news channel and social media platforms in different ways; associating him with serial killers of characters of movies, skeletons and Bahubali has been causing immense harm to the reputation of the Petitioner and his family.
Upon which the Court suggested to file a defamation case regarding the same but a gag order cannot be passed.
Rohatgi is arguing, “Everyday Delhi High Court passes ten orders on these URLs…you cannot show me in this light.”
Justice Manmohan said, “Gag Orders are only passed in the rarest of the rare cases, for instance, if the journalist comes to know that the Police has a mobile number of the terrorists, they cannot publish that because the terrorists will be warned…in those kinds of cases. These are called super injunctions.”
Rohatgi apprised the Bench that now the matter is before the trial court and insisted for interim measures to stop such defamatory reporting against the Petitioner.
“We live in a free country, we all have to pay little price for that, and I think it is worth that price to stay in a free country”, remarked Justice Manmohan.
However, Rohatgi continued to insist that Petitioner and his family’s reputation is at stake as Petitioner’s brother, Veerendra Heggade, is Member of Parliament and hereditary administrator of the Jain Dharmasthala Temple in Karnataka.
Justice Manmohan agreed and said, “There must be some limit to it.”
Further, Rohatgi insisted that some protection be granted to the Petitioner in terms to either take the social media reports down or not to do so in future.
However, Justice Manmohan suggested, “Let the trial court apply its mind afresh.”
“We direct…to decide the application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 CPC within two weeks from the next day of hearing…Any observations made by the High Court in the impugned order shall not influence the trial court while considering the application for stay afresh”, the Court recorded in its Order.
Case Background
An SLP was filed by Hareshendra Kumar D challenging the judgment of Karnataka High Court, quashing the gag order against the journalist for reporting the Dharmasthala mass burial case.
The High Court of Karnataka stated, “The order has now cast its net so wide that it threatens to ensnare any voice against the plaintiff, the family or the place. This could not have been issued on bereft of reasons. The order speaks of prohibition of defamatory statements. Not one word of what kind of statements are defamatory for the Court to pass the aforequoted order is found in the order. There is no semblance of reason for the ultimate relief that is granted.” Accordingly, the order was quashed by the High Court.”
Cause Title: Harshendra Kumar D Versus Kudla Rampage And Ors (SLP(C) No. 21969/2025 IV-A)