A Velan, the advocate, who appeared for the YouTube channel, in a press release lauding the court order, stated, "Karnataka High Court did not just pass a judgment; it restored a fundamental pillar of our democracy."
Published Aug 01, 2025 | 5:22 PM ⚊ Updated Aug 01, 2025 | 5:22 PM
The Karnataka High Court. (Creative Commons)
Synopsis: The Court said, “The application filed by Kudla Rampage Editor-in-Chief Ajay is partially allowed. The impugned ex parte injunction order passed by the trial court on 8.7.2025 is quashed. The case is being sent back to the competent court for fresh consideration of the interlocutory application. The trial court should take note of the points made in this order.”
The Karnataka High Court on Friday, 1 August, lifted the media gag imposed by a Bengaluru civil court in the Dharmasthala mass burial case.
According to Bar and Bench, Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed a petition by YouTube channel Kudla Rampage challenging the order that restrained media houses, YouTube channels etc from publishing “defamatory content” against the family running the Dharmasthala Temple.
The Court said, “The application filed by Kudla Rampage Editor-in-Chief Ajay is partially allowed. The impugned ex parte injunction order passed by the trial court on 8.7.2025 is quashed. The case is being sent back to the competent court for fresh consideration of the interlocutory application. The trial court should take note of the points made in this order.”
“The competent court should decide the case expeditiously. This court has not expressed any opinion on the civil suit, criminal proceedings, charges, counter-charges. All arguments between the parties are kept open except for one point considered in the order.”
A Velan, the advocate, who appeared for the YouTube channel, in a press release lauding the court order, stated, “Karnataka High Court did not just pass a judgment; it restored a fundamental pillar of our democracy. The attempt to draw a curtain of silence over a matter of profound public agony and national importance has failed.”
“In a landmark verdict that will resonate far beyond the confines of this case, the High Court has quashed the sweeping and unprecedented gag order that sought to muzzle the media and stifle public scrutiny of the Dharmasthala mass burials case.”
The advocate further added, “Our argument before the High Court was simple and rested on a bedrock constitutional principle: In a democracy, the public’s right to know is sacrosanct, especially when the subject is a criminal investigation of this magnitude.”
Speaking of the trial court order, he added, “The trial court’s ex-parte injunction was a textbook example of an unconstitutional ‘prior restraint’ on speech. It was overbroad, passed without jurisdiction, and cast a chilling effect not only on the 338 named respondents but on any media house or individual who dared to report on the case. It sought to criminalize journalism.”
“While the matter now returns to the trial court for reconsideration, the High Court has provided an unambiguous roadmap, one that champions the principles of natural justice and free expression. We are confident that the trial court will now proceed with the wisdom and clarity provided by this landmark order,” the release further read.
A city civil court in Bengaluru granted a sweeping ex parte interim injunction in favour of Harshendra Kumar D, the brother of Dharmasthala Dharmadhikari D Veerendra Heggade, directing the removal and de-indexing of over 8,000 online links – including news reports, social media posts, and videos – that allegedly carry defamatory content against Kumar, his family members, institutions run by the family, and the Dharmasthala Manjunathaswamy Temple.
Much of the material pertains to FIR No. 39/2025, registered earlier this month at the Dharmasthala Police Station, following explosive allegations made by a former sanitation worker at the temple that hundreds of men, women and girls were victims of sexual assault and murder and coverups over a period of 20 years in the temple town of Dharmastala.
The order, passed by X Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge Vijaya Kumar Rai on 20 July, directs 338 defendants – including journalists, YouTube creators, digital media outlets, and tech companies such as Google, Meta, WhatsApp, and X Corp – to take down or de-index the specified content with immediate effect.
The court had also issued a temporary injunction restraining the “publishing, circulating, forwarding, uploading, transmitting and telecasting” any defamatory content and information against the plaintiff.
The civil suit (O.S. No. 5185/2025), filed on 18 July by Harshendra Kumar through his Special Power of Attorney holder Rakshith Kumar provided an exhaustive list of 8,842 links as evidence of what the plaintiff describes as “false, fabricated and concocted stories” connecting him, his family, and the Dharmasthala temple administration to the whistleblower’s allegations.
According to the petition, the materials have caused significant harm to the reputation not only of Harshendra but also to the Manjunathaswamy Temple and the various educational and charitable institutions managed by the family and the temple trust.
(Edited by Sumavarsha, with inputs from Nolan Patrick Pinto)
