The Karnataka High Court on Thursday directed police not to take coercive steps against BJP leader Ravi Patil and two of his supporters in a case alleging an attempt to delete the names of 198 Muslim voters from electoral rolls during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process in Belagavi.
Justice Venkatesh Naik T, sitting at the Dharwad Bench, passed the interim order while hearing a petition filed by Patil and his supporters, Shankar Birappa Naik and Prashant Mundimani, seeking to quash the FIR registered by Belagavi’s Market Police Station.
The court issued notice to the Karnataka government and Meerasab Sanadi, a Congress worker who filed the complaint. It directed the state to submit its objections and the latest investigation report.
“Till then, the respondent-police/IO shall not take any coercive steps against the petitioners,” the court ordered.
The matter has been listed for October 13.
FIR Alleges Attempt to Delete 198 Muslim Voters
According to the FIR, the accused allegedly conspired with around 20 to 25 others to target Muslim voters and submitted approximately 198 Form 7 applications seeking deletion of their names from the electoral rolls during the SIR exercise.
The complainant alleged that the voters were still residing at the addresses listed in the applications and that the forms were submitted to remove their names deliberately.
Police registered the case under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, including Sections 318(4), 336(3), 336(4), 353 and 61(2), along with other provisions relating to the allegations.
The allegations have not been established in court.
BJP Leader Challenges FIR
Patil and the two other petitioners argued that filing objections during electoral roll revision, including objections concerning multiple entries, does not by itself amount to a criminal offence.
They relied on the Representation of the People Act, 1950, the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, and the Election Commission’s SIR guidelines.
The petitioners also argued that the FIR did not identify any specific forged document or signature allegedly created or used by them. On the cheating charge, they submitted that the complaint did not establish the required dishonest intention.
The High Court has not ruled on the merits of these arguments. Its order provides interim protection while the state prepares its response.
Belagavi Court Had Earlier Granted Anticipatory Bail
Earlier, a Belagavi court granted Patil anticipatory bail on October 3 in connection with the same case.
The court had observed that merely submitting Form 7 does not automatically lead to deletion of a voter’s name, as electoral authorities carry out their own verification.
Senior Advocate M. Aruna Shyam, along with advocates Shubham F. Kusalapur and Deveeraj T. Bastwadkar, appeared for the petitioners.
The case is scheduled for its next hearing on October 13, 2026.
