‘Nobody Can Be Stopped’: Karnataka HC Clears Mysuru Torchlight March on I-Day Eve

Mysuru: The Karnataka High Court on Friday (August 14) set aside the police decision denying permission to a torchlight march proposed by the Hindu Jagarana Vedike in Mysuru, holding that citizens cannot be prevented from celebrating Independence Day merely on the apprehension of communal tension.

Justice Suraj Govindaraj directed the authorities to allow the organisation to hold its ‘Akhanda Bharatha Sankalpa Diwas’ torchlight march from the RMC Ganesha Temple to Doddagadiyara Circle between 5:30 PM and 7:30 PM on August 14.

The court, however, imposed conditions on the procession, including that participants must move in an orderly manner with only five people in each row, leaving the remaining portion of the road free for traffic.

‘Nobody ought to be prevented from celebrating Independence Day’

The court rejected the State's argument that the procession could lead to communal tension and said the fact that criminal cases had been registered against some organisers could not, by itself, be a reason to stop them from participating in Independence Day celebrations.

“…Independence Day is required to be celebrated by every citizen of India. Such being the case, the Independence Day is being proposed to be celebrated, there cannot be any issues raised as regards communal tension or otherwise… The last submission made by AAG is that as regards to some of the organising members, FIRs and chargesheets are filed, and there is a possibility of them involving in unlawful activities which could disturb public peace. Merely because chargesheets have been filed against certain persons does not mean they cannot be allowed to participate in Independence Day celebrations…”, the court observed.

The State had raised concerns over traffic disruption, particularly the movement of emergency vehicles and ambulances. The court, however, noted that the proposed procession involved only around 100 people walking over a 4-km route.

Since the march would remain moving rather than remain stationed at one location, the court found that the likely impact on traffic would be limited.

Nine organisers to take responsibility for the procession

The petitioners, represented by Senior Advocate Dr Aruna Shyam, assured the court that they would cooperate with all conditions and take responsibility for ensuring that the march remained peaceful.

A memo submitted on August 12 listed nine organisers who would be responsible for the conduct of the procession. Their Aadhaar cards and address details were also provided to the authorities.

“…Sr. Counsel Aruna Shyam appearing for the petitioners has submitted that organisers would take all responsibility with respect to the said procession and ensure that no untoward incident takes place. A memo has been filed on 12.08.2026 giving details of nine organisers who would be responsible for making sure that the procession would be conducted in a peaceful manner. Along with the same memo, Aadhar cards of organisers are also produced providing details of their addresses etc which should always be available with respondent authorities in the event of any action to be taken, as Sr. Counsel Aruna Shyam submitted, in the unlikely possibility of an untoward event happening”, the court clarified.

The court ultimately held that “all citizens would be required to celebrate Independence Day and nobody ought to be prevented from celebrating Independence Day” and quashed the police endorsement refusing permission for the march.

The court also directed the authorities to implement the operative part of its order and asked Additional Advocate General Bhanu Prakash to communicate the order to the concerned officials by email or telephone.

Why had the State opposed the march?

During Friday's hearing, AAG Bhanu Prakash argued that the procession could cause traffic congestion and interfere with the movement of ambulances and other emergency vehicles. The State also suggested an alternative route.

The State further alleged that some organisers had criminal antecedents and could potentially engage in activities affecting public order. The court had earlier expressed concern after banners advertising the event were allegedly put up despite permission for the procession not having been granted at that stage. The court had orally criticised the organisation over the banners, observing that their appearance suggested a lack of control over their own members.

Senior Advocate Dr Aruna Shyam, appearing for the petitioners, argued that celebrating Independence Day was a fundamental right and maintained that the proposed route was sufficiently wide and would not create significant congestion. The petitioners also told the court that the banners had been put up by third parties and not by the organisers.

The organisation agreed to comply with restrictions imposed by the court and undertook to ensure that no untoward incident occurred.

Earlier concerns over communal tension

The dispute reached the High Court after the Mandi Police Station in Mysuru issued an endorsement on August 6 refusing permission for the proposed event. The organisation had sought to hold an ‘Akhanda Bharatha Sankalpa Diwas’ programme comprising the torchlight march and a stage event in Mysuru on the evening of August 14. The petitioners argued that celebrating Independence on the eve of August 15 had become a tradition because India attained independence at midnight.

On August 13, the High Court had orally reprimanded the Hindu Jagaran Vedike over the alleged putting up of banners for the event before permission had been granted.

During the earlier hearing, the State had alleged that some of the accused persons had criminal antecedents and claimed they would visit railway stations, identify people as Bangladeshis and attack them as part of alleged vigilantism.

The State had also described the proposed route as passing through the “most sensitive area” in the “whole of Mysuru”, arguing that the march could potentially trigger communal violence around Independence Day.

The court had previously warned that strict responsibility could be imposed on the organisers for any incident arising during the procession. While allowing the march, however, the High Court made it clear that its order does not grant permission for the proposed stage programme at the Anjaneya Swami Devasthana. 

The court said the organisers could hold that programme only if they had obtained the required permission from the authorities. The petitioners had submitted that the venue was near the final checkpoint at Doddagadiyara Circle. The torchlight march will therefore go ahead subject to the conditions laid down by the High Court, including maintaining discipline and ensuring that traffic movement is not unnecessarily obstructed.