The Karnataka Excessive Court docket dominated on June 25 that momentary injunctions and restraint orders may be granted solely in opposition to defendants in a swimsuit and never in opposition to third events. The ruling by Justice M Nagaprasanna got here on a petition associated to a trademark dispute between journalist Rachappa Satish Kumar of BTV Kannada and a agency referred to as Eaglesight Media.
The journalist and the tv channel, the place he’s a director, approached the excessive courtroom stating that their pages on all social media platforms had been eliminated with regards to a civil courtroom order, which was issued in a swimsuit registered by Eaglesight Media, with which they’ve a number of courtroom circumstances pending.
In its plaint earlier than the extra metropolis civil and periods decide, Eaglesight Media had argued that the emblems and brand of BTV Kannada have been registered with it.
The excessive courtroom petition was filed below the premise that the petitioners had not been made events to Eaglesight Media’s swimsuit, whereas all of the social media platforms had been.
The petitioners argued that the civil courtroom’s momentary injunction violated pure justice because the swimsuit was stuffed with allegations that they needed to defend themselves in opposition to. Nonetheless, the opposing counsel argued this is able to solely be a continuance of a 2022 order in one other piece of litigation the place there was a restraint in opposition to the petitioners.
The excessive courtroom noticed that “what needed to be completed straight can’t be completed not directly”, stating that the act of not making the petitioners occasion to the swimsuit was a doubtful step.
“Restraint orders in opposition to third events who usually are not made events to the swimsuit can’t be granted by any canon of legislation. Whereas litigants might make or might not make sure events as defendants, although looking for a prayer in opposition to these individuals, the involved Court docket can not blissfully ignore the legislation and go the orders of the sort that’s now handed,” the courtroom dominated.
Story continues beneath this advert
Setting apart the civil courtroom order, the excessive courtroom directed that the petitioners must be impleaded as events to the swimsuit, failing which no order may very well be handed in opposition to them.
Bengaluru civil courts have handed ex parte gag orders and injunctions in opposition to the media on a number of events.
A outstanding instance of this can be a gag order that BJP MP Tejasvi Surya obtained within the run-up to the 2019 Lok Sabha elections in opposition to 49 media organisations. It was later struck down by a division bench of the Karnataka Excessive Court docket.
Extra lately, former chief minister Basavaraj Bommai obtained such an order in opposition to “defamatory materials” in August 2024, when an advocate claimed to be in possession of personal movies of the BJP chief.
In 2023, BJP MLA Madal Virupakshappa obtained a gag order in opposition to defamatory opinions and panel discussions within the context of corruption allegations levelled in opposition to him and his son Prashant.