The Aryavarth Express
Agency(Karnataka): The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday extended the interim protection previously provided to journalist Rahul Sivasankar, who has petitioned the court for the dismissal of a First Information Report (FIR) lodged against him. The FIR was based on a tweet he made regarding the state government’s financial support for the well-being of religious minorities. Justice S Vishwajith Shetty of the single-judge bench has ordered that until the next hearing, the complainant should not escalate the situation against the petitioner.
Moreover, the court sent an urgent notice to the complainant, N Ambaresh. The public prosecutor presented the details of the complaint that led to the FIR by the Criminal Investigation Department at the police station, following instructions from a prior hearing.
Rahul Sivasankar faces charges under Sections 153A and 505 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), following a complaint from Kolar council member N Ambaresh, who criticized Sivasankar’s “sarcastic” tweet about funding for the development of Waqf properties, Haj Bhavan in Mangalore, and Christian worship places. According to the council member, Sivasankar’s statements could potentially provoke discord and hatred among different religious communities.
Sivasankar defended his tweet, stating it was based on verified facts from various newspaper reports and the state government’s budget announcement. He argued that the tweet simply highlighted three factual points and contended that the FIR’s premise, suggesting he spread false information, is baseless. He emphasized that his role as a journalist involves sharing such factual updates to raise public awareness on significant issues, and this should not be misconstrued as criminal behavior.
Furthermore, Sivasankar explained that his tweet was an inquiry into why temples, which significantly contribute to the state’s revenue, received no budgetary allocation, while substantial funds were directed to other religious sites. He argued that posing such a question should not be viewed as an attempt to stir animosity among religious groups. He suggested that if such inquiries are deemed to incite hatred, it would discourage journalists and citizens from raising legitimate questions on religious matters in India.
