Runs Contrary To Article 13(2): Karnataka High Court Stays Government Order Prohibiting Gathering In Public Places
This order came to be passed on the same day when the State Authorities were to hold a meeting with the organisers of the proposed Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) route march.
The Karnaraka High Court has passed an interim order in a petition filed by the Punashchetana Seva Samste, directing the stay of a Government Order which declared gathering of more than 10 individuals as unlawful assembly. The High Court held that Article 13(2) of the Constitution holds a bar against such encroachment, and the impugned order ran contrary to Article 13(2).
This order came to be passed on the same day when the State Authorities were to hold a meeting with the organisers of the proposed Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) route march.
The High Court was considering a challenge to the Government Order dated October 18, 2025, declaring congregation or gathering of more than 10 individuals, as unlawful assemblies, thereby rendering participants susceptible to penal consequences under the BNS, 2023.
The Single Bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna held, “Therefore, the impugned Government Order runs contrary to Article 13(2) and thereby, taking away the fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) and (b).”
Advocate Ashok Haranahalli represented the Petitioner, while Additional Government Advocate represented the Respondent.
Arguments
The Counsel for the Petitioner had drawn the Court’s attention to Section 31 of the Karnataka Police Act, regulating assemblies and subsection (6) prescribing the manner of regulation. As per the Petitioner, the Government Order trespassed upon the rights enshrined in Chapter III of the Constitution of India, specifically the freedoms under Article 19(1)(a) and (b).
Reasoning
Reiterating that fundamental rights cannot be curtailed by executive orders, the Bench stated, “Article 13(2) of the Constitution holds a bar against such encroachment, that Chapter III of the Constitution can only be abridged by a law and not by an administrative order, or a Government Order.”
The Bench further asserted that allowing the encroachment to operate would prima facie mean to permit liberty granted to citizens under Articles 1(1)(a) and (b) to be taken away by an executive order.
The Bench thus ordered, “In the light of the aforesaid reasons, the Government Order being in manifest violation of Article 13(2) of the Constitution of India, this Court deems it appropriate to stay the operation of the impugned Government Order, and all consequential proceedings that have emanated therefrom, till the next date of hearing.”
The Bench has listed the matter on November 17, 2025, for further hearing.
Cause Title: Punashchetana Seva Samste v. State of Karnataka (Case No.:WP 107929/2025)
Appearance
Petitioner: Advocate Ashok Haranahalli
Respondent: Additional Government Advocate, Advocate G.I. Gachhinamath