Govt yet to study Somasekhara Commission report

Mangalore, September 22: Christian youths facing criminal cases in the aftermath of attacks on churches in September 2008 will have to wait for some time before cases against them are dropped. The state government that set up the Justice B K Somasekhara Commission of Inquiry to go into the issues that led to the attacks and incidents thereafter is yet to take a view on the report, said S M Jaamdar, principal home secretary.

The law department is examining the inquiry commission report, Jaamdar told reporters here on Wednesday. We have received various representations (from Christian organizations) urging the state government to withdraw cases filed against Christians, he said adding the home department could take forward the process once the government takes a view on the report. The question of processing files to drop the cases will be taken up thereafter, he said.

Karnataka which presently has a cyber crime police station in Bangalore will get three more __ in Mangalore, Hubli and Mysore. The state government around a fortnight ago received guidelines from the Union government to set up these cyber police stations given the increase in white collar crimes, he said, adding that the state government would forward the proposal received from DGP-CID to the Union government within a week.

After a rap on the knuckles from the State Government on failure to serve non-bailable arrest warrants on the Reddy brothers, Jaamdar said the state government has issued guidelines 15-days ago deputing one lower level police personnel at every court who would monitor the process and coordinate with jurisdictional police stations. It is time that a separate process serving wing was set up either under the judiciary or home department for this, he said.

The Forensic Science Laboratory, Bangalore, is being modernised at a cost of Rs 3 crore this year. This entails purchase of automatic fingerprint identification system, computer programme for graphology and state of the art equipment to deal with serology tests. The DNA Centre in Bangalore is now self-sufficient and its dependence of Hyderabad-based Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology (CCMB) has come down, Jaamdar noted.

Comments

Add new comment

Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.

HC refuses to quash probe against Mangaluru WhatsApp admin over offensive posts

News Network

February 1,2026

Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash an investigation against a WhatsApp group administrator accused of allowing the circulation of obscene and offensive images depicting Hindutva politicians and idols in 2021.

Justice M Nagaprasanna observed that, prima facie, the ingredients of the offence under Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code were made out. “The offence under Section 295A of the IPC is met to every word of its ingredient, albeit prima facie,” the judge said.

The petitioner, Sirajuddin, a resident of Belthangady taluk in Dakshina Kannada district, had challenged the FIR registered against him at the CEN (Cyber, Economics and Narcotics) police station, Mangaluru, for offences under Section 295A of the IPC and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act. Section 295A relates to punishment for deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage the religious feelings of any class of citizens.

According to the complaint filed by K Jayaraj Salian, also a resident of Belthangady taluk, he received a WhatsApp group link from an unknown source and was added to the group after accessing it. The group reportedly had six administrators and around 250 participants, where obscene and offensive images depicting Hindu deities and certain political figures were allegedly circulated repeatedly.

Sirajuddin was arrested in connection with the case and later released on bail on February 16, 2021. He argued before the court that he was being selectively targeted, while other administrators—including the creator of the group—were neither arrested nor investigated. He also contended that the Magistrate could not have taken cognisance of the offence under Section 295A without prior sanction under Section 196(1) of the CrPC.

Rejecting the argument, Justice Nagaprasanna held that prior sanction is required only at the stage of taking cognisance, and not at the stage of registration of the crime or during investigation.

The judge noted that the State had produced the entire investigation material before the court. “A perusal of the material reveals depictions of Hindu deities in an extraordinarily obscene, demeaning and profane manner. The content is such that its reproduction in a judicial order would itself be inappropriate,” the court said, adding that the material, on its face, had the tendency to outrage religious feelings and disturb communal harmony.

Observing that the case was still at the investigation stage, the court said it could not interdict the probe at this juncture. However, it expressed concern that the investigating officer appeared to have not proceeded uniformly against all administrators. The court clarified that if the investigation revealed the active involvement of any member in permitting the circulation of such content, they must also be proceeded against.

“At this investigative stage, any further observation by this Court would be unnecessary,” the order concluded.

Comments