The Karnataka High Court on Thursday constituted a 10-member high-level committee to address disparities arising between advocates, law enforcement, and the administration.
The committee comprises the Advocate General, the Karnataka Director General of Police (DGP), and the Principal Secretary of the Home Department.
This decision was announced by the division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit during the hearing of a petition initiated suo motu concerning the incident in Chikkamagaluru where an advocate was allegedly assaulted by the police, leading to a law and order issue in the region. The state entrusted the investigation to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID).
The High Court emphasized that, in addition to the investigative agency’s responsibilities, “In our considered opinion, which the esteemed members of the Bar also concurred, all stakeholders should convene at a single forum to deliberate on the matter and foster a congenial atmosphere, thereby restoring harmony between the Bar, the police, and the District administration.” The committee includes senior advocate and former Advocate General Uday Holla, along with senior advocates Jaykumar S Patil, V Lakshminarayana, KN Phaneendra, D R Ravishankar, Vivek Subba Reddy (President of the Advocates Association, Bengaluru), and Azad Ali Khan (President of the Chikkamagaluru Bar Association).
The committee has been directed to convene at the Advocate General’s office on December 9 at 11 am and subsequently submit its recommendations to the High Court. Six police officers from the Chikkamagaluru Town Police Station, including a sub-inspector, were suspended in connection with the November 30 incident, where advocate Preetham was allegedly assaulted after being apprehended by the police for riding a two-wheeler without a helmet. Following protests by the advocates, the police officers were suspended, and the CID took charge of the investigation. During the Thursday hearing, the High Court was informed that some police officers had gone on strike in response to the suspensions.
Expressing grave concern, the court stated, “We share the same anguish. Strict discipline being the primary requirement of the police force, it would be a case of the fence swallowing the crop. What a section of the police staff has allegedly done is absolutely unacceptable to this court and to civil society.” However, the court declined to order the arrest of the police officers involved in the November 30 incident, emphasizing the need for restraint. Citing the Supreme Court judgment in Lalita Kumari Vs Government of Uttar Pradesh, the court asserted that this matter falls within the domain of the Investigating Agency, and “therefore restraint in this regard is warranted.” The court adjourned the hearing to December 12.
