The Karnataka High Court has declined to stop police investigations into a dispute in Puttur, Dakshina Kannada, that subsequently developed into a communal controversy. The original incident involved a disagreement at a photocopy shop on August 21 between customers and the shop owners over alleged damage to a birth certificate. The dispute was followed by intervention from Hindu organisations, arrests and a bandh in Puttur. Two FIRs were registered in connection with the events. While considering the case, the High Court stressed peaceful coexistence and communal harmony and allowed the police investigation to continue.
The Karnataka High Court has declined to stay investigations by the police in regard to a clash at a photo and digital copy centre in Puttur, which was followed by protests, bandh and communal clashes in the city.
The clash reportedly took place on August 21 at Dream Destination Jana Seva Kendra in Darbe area of Puttur. According to police versions and court records, documents like the child’s birth certificate of Fathimath Miswan were submitted for copying and lamination. The clash took place when the birth certificate got damaged. There was an altercation between Miswan, her relatives and shop owners Anjana Pai and her son Sudarshan Pai.
On the complaint from both sides, separate cases were registered by the police. A case of attempt to murder was registered against the shop owners while the customers were charged with intentional insult and criminal intimidation. Sudarshan Pai was arrested in the wake of the clash. Another case was subsequently filed against the social-media activist of Hindu Jagaran Vedike, Dinesh Panjiga.
The dispute soon moved beyond the original shop altercation. Hindu organisations demanded stronger police action against the customers and called for a Puttur bandh on August 25. Further demonstrations were held in the following days, including a “Puttur Chalo” programme on August 31.
When the matter reached the Karnataka High Court, counsel for the shop owners alleged that the investigation was one-sided. The state, however, argued that the original dispute had no religious connection and had subsequently been given a communal colour.
On September 1, Justice M. Nagaprasanna allowed investigations in the rival cases to continue, saying both sides should be investigated. The court also questioned why a bandh had been called while the matter was before the judiciary and stressed the importance of peaceful coexistence and communal harmony. It granted interim protection from arrest to Panjiga in the social-media case.
Police investigations into the underlying altercation and related cases remain ongoing.
