Bengaluru, July 9 (Reporter) The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday dismissED a public interest litigation (PIL) that accused several prominent figures within the the BJP and right-wing activist circles of delivering hate speeches.. The petition, filed in 2022 by advocate Mohamad Anwar on behalf of Mohammed Khaleelulla, targeted BJP leaders such as KS Eshwarappa, P Renukacharya, CT Ravi, Pratapsimha, Basanagouda R Patil, Shobha Karandlaje, Tejasvi Surya, and activists Sulibele Chakravarthy, Pramodh Muthalik (Rashtriya Hindu Sena Chief), and Rishi Kumaraswamy. During the proceedings, advocate Mohamad Anwar argued that these individuals had allegedly made statements intended to sow discord among religious communities. However, the bench comprising Chief Justice NV Anjaria and Justice KV Aravind found the petition to be overly generalised and lacking in concrete evidence. They expressed concerns that the petition appeared to have motives other than genuine public interest and criticised its vague allegations. In their judgment, the bench stated, "On careful consideration of the petition, it appears too general to be entertained. The allegations lack substantiation and seem to serve a purpose beyond public welfare. Such petitions, which seem politically or communally motivated, cannot be entertained under the guise of Public Interest Litigation." Chief Justice Anjaria, during the hearing, also rebuked the petitioner for failing to disclose sufficient details about their background and professional affiliation. "We are not aware of your client. Who drafted this petition? Why are you misusing the High Court platform with such filings?" the Chief Justice remarked sharply. The petitioner eventually revealed that he was a civil contractor and a social activist, but the bench remained critical, describing the petition as an "uncivil" use of the court process. Due to the petition's broad and unfocused nature, the court indicated it was inclined to dismiss it outright. The petitioner's counsel requested an adjournment, citing the unavailability of their senior colleague, but the court refused, questioning the validity and seriousness of the petition. Chief Justice Anjaria further emphasised that if the petitioners felt offended by any statements, they should pursue appropriate legal actions like filing a defamation complaint rather than using the High Court for such matters. The bench also took note of the guidelines set by the Supreme Court in cases like Tehseen Poonwalla vs Union of India, aimed at addressing issues such as fake news, hate speech, and mob violence. However, despite these references, the Karnataka High Court proceeded to dismiss the petition summarily, recording the arguments of the petitioner's counsel but ultimately finding them insufficient to warrant further consideration...////...