The Karnataka High Court on Friday strongly criticised BJP MLC N. Ravikumar for allegedly referring to Kalaburagi Deputy Commissioner Fouzia Taranum as being “from Pakistan” during a protest, observing that such remarks cannot be justified merely because she is a Muslim.
Hearing Ravikumar’s petition seeking to quash criminal proceedings against him, Justice M. Nagaprasanna orally remarked that Fouzia Taranum is an IAS officer serving the State of Karnataka and questioned how her religion could be used to make such a statement.
“Just because she is a Muslim, you cannot call her ‘from Pakistan’. She is an IAS officer of the State of Karnataka,” the judge observed during the hearing.
Case Against BJP MLC
Ravikumar is facing criminal proceedings before a Bengaluru Special Court for MPs and MLAs over remarks allegedly made during the “Kalaburagi Chalo” protest held in connection with the alleged detention of Leader of Opposition in the Karnataka Legislative Council, Chalavadi Narayanaswamy, in May 2025.
According to the petitioner, he had only stated during the protest that “all police officers are slaves of the in-charge minister” and denied making the alleged communal remark.
A complaint was later filed by a Kalaburagi resident, following which police registered a case against Ravikumar under Sections 196(1)(a)(b) and 353(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
Court Stresses Responsible Political Discourse
The High Court emphasised that political leaders must exercise restraint while addressing the public and avoid making communal or inflammatory statements.
The judge observed that politicians should focus on issues affecting public welfare rather than engaging in personal attacks and mudslinging.
The court also remarked that criminal courts were increasingly burdened with avoidable cases arising from irresponsible public statements, affecting the disposal of serious offences such as murder and extortion.
Apology Does Not Erase Statement, Says Court
During the hearing, Ravikumar’s counsel informed the court that an apology had been issued to Deputy Commissioner Fouzia Taranum soon after the incident.
However, the court questioned whether an apology could undo the impact of the statement, observing that such remarks should not have been made in the first place.
Court Questions Restrictions on Tiranga Yatra
Ravikumar’s counsel also argued that the protest was a “Tiranga Yatra” and alleged that the Kalaburagi administration had denied permission to carry the national flag.
The State, however, maintained that permission had not been granted for the protest.
The High Court directed the State government to produce records relating to the protesters’ representation seeking permission for the march.
Justice Nagaprasanna observed that if authorities had indeed prevented people from carrying the national flag, the court would examine the matter seriously. At the same time, the judge reiterated that no grievance regarding the protest could justify making communal remarks against a public servant.
The matter has been posted for further hearing on August 20, when the State is expected to place the relevant records before the court.
