Dharmasthala burial case: The News Minute moves Karnataka High Court against gag orders

Spunklane Media Private Limited, which owns web portal The News Minute (TNM), has approached the Karnataka High Court challenging two separate gag orders that have allegedly been used to curb its reporting on the murder of 17-year-old Sowjanya and the recent allegations involving the Dharmasthala temple and burials [Spunklane Media Pvt Ltd v Harshendra Kumar D & ors and connected case]..In one petition, TNM has challenged an ex-parte gag order dated March 22 passed by VI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore.The order was passed in a suit filed by employees of the Sri Kshetra Dharmasthala Rural Development Project. Although TNM was not made a party to the suit, it received notices from the plaintiffs demanding the removal of specific articles and a tweet, citing the court's order and invoking the 'John Doe' classification. 'John Doe' classification allows courts to issue orders against unknown persons whose identities are not known at the relevant time.Even though TNM was not a party to the suit and the content in question was not defamatory, it took down the content temporarily 'without prejudice' just to avoid further legal issues.However, the March 22 order was later cited again in emails demanding TNM to delete another video.TNM refused to comply, pointing out that the video was not listed in the schedule to the ex-parte order and that the video only reported verifiable facts including the filing of an FIR and public statements made by officials, including Karnataka's Home Minister.TNM further stated that despite being fully aware of its identity and having previously litigated against it, the respondents were still trying to harass TNM by asking it to remove content, under the 'John Doe' classification, without giving it an opportunity to be heard..In a separate petition, the news portal has challenged an ex-parte gag order dated July 18 passed by a X Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, in a suit where TNM was named as defendant No 47 along with 338 other defendants.The order restrained TNM from publishing any content relating to the Dharmasthala controversy.According to TNM, the order was passed without giving it prior notice, as required under Order 39 Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), and without recording any reason for why the court chose to proceed without hearing TNM first.As per the plea, the order fails to distinguish between actual defamatory content and fair, factual reporting on matters of significant public interest, and the sweeping nature of the order amounted to a gag on press freedom.."The Impugned Order has a serious effect of stifling free speech and consequently has a chilling effect on the Petitioner's fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression as guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of India," the petition states..TNM has stressed in both petitions that its reporting did not attribute wrongdoing to any specific individual from the temple administration. However, the respondents were falsely accusing them of defamation, while seeking broad takedowns and future restraints on publication.Notably, TNM also relied on the recent Karnataka High Court judgment in a similar case filed by the YouTube channel Kudla Rampage, where the High Court quashed the ex-parte gag order dated July 18, 2025.Drawing from this precedent, TNM has sought similar relief, urging the High Court to quash both ex-parte gag orders passed against it.TNM is being represented by Advocate Pradeep Nayak of Keystone Partners..The background to these petitions lies in a wave of media coverage that followed serious allegations made by a former sanitation worker employed at the Dharmasthala Manjunathaswamy Temple.The worker claimed in a police complaint that he had been forced by his supervisors to bury numerous bodies, including those of women, for nearly two decades.While the complaint did not name any specific individuals as accused in a crime, the revelations triggered significant public debate and media reportage, including coverage by The News Minute..Following this, Harshendra Kumar, Secretary of the Dharmasthala temple institutions, filed a civil defamation suit before a sessions court in Bengaluru, listing 8,842 allegedly defamatory links.These included 4,140 YouTube videos, 932 Facebook posts, 3,584 Instagram posts, 108 news articles, 37 Reddit posts, and 41 tweets.The sessions court then passed a blanket gag order against reporting the issue.