NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday ordered a trial court in Karnataka to reconsider a petition by the Dharmasthala Temple secretary seeking to block the publication of allegedly defamatory reports related to the Dharmasthala mass burials case.
A bench of Justices Rajesh Bindal and Manmohan questioned whether a media gag was required in the matter. “We direct the trial court to decide the application within two weeks from the next day of hearing. Any observations made by the High Court shall not influence the trial court while entertaining the application for stay afresh,” the apex court ordered.
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the temple administration, contended that day after day, news channels and social media were running defamatory reports and showed the court posts of allegedly defamatory internet memes. The apex court was hearing plea of Harshendra Kumar D, Secretary of the Dharmasthala Temple body, challenging a recent order of the Karnataka High Court quashing a media gag on reportage surrounding the controversial Dharmasthala mass burial case.
On August 1, the High Court had set aside an earlier gag order issued by a Bengaluru civil court restraining reportage on the burial case. He approached the top court seeking the removal of alleged defamatory content targeting the family that manages the temple.
On July 23, the top court had declined to hear a petition filed by YouTube channel Third Eye challenging a sweeping gag order that restrained media houses from reporting on matters related to the brother of Dharamadhikari D Veerendra Heggade of Dharamsthala in Karnataka. The gag order was passed on reports on the alleged murders of women in Dharmasthala in the state’s Dakshina Kannada district.
The YouTube channel had questioned the legality of the order, which directed as many as 390 media houses to remove nearly 9,000 links and stories related to the Dharamsthala burial case. The gag order was passed by the local court in Kumar’s defamation suit alleging the spread of false and defamatory online content, despite the absence of specific allegations against him or the temple
