Dharmasthala burials: Why judge who passed media gag order requested transfer of case

Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru Vijay Kumar Rai, who had recently passed an interim order restraining media houses and YouTube channels from publishing any defamatory content against the family running the Dharmasthala temple, has requested that the matter be placed before another judge. .This, after journalist Naveen Soorinje pointed out that Judge Rai had been a student of the 1995-1998 batch of the SDM Law College, Mangalore, which is run by the Dharmasthala Manjunatheshwara Trust. Soorinje was among those affected by the media gag passed by Judge Rai on July 18, as certain interviews he conducted about the history of the Dharmasthala Temple were also ordered to be taken down. .The interim media gag order was passed in a defamation suit by Harshendra Kumar D (plaintiff), brother of the Dharmasthala Temple's Dharmadhikari (hereditary head) Veerendra Heggade, who claimed that his family was being defamed through media reportage on claims by a sanitation worker that hundreds of people were murdered and buried at the premises of Dharmasthala.On July 24, Soorinje wrote a letter to his lawyer, Advocate S Balakrishnan, requesting him to take steps so that this defamation case is posted before another judge, since Judge Rai was a student of SDM. After the matter was brought to Judge Rai's notice by way of a memo, he has now put in a request to place the case before another judge. On August 2, Judge Rai said it would be appropriate to place the case before the Chief City Civil Sessions Judge for necessary orders in this regard.The lawyers representing Harshendra Kumar had opposed any such move, arguing that the case should not be transferred only based on a memo.Judge Rai, in turn, admitted that it was true that he had studied in SDM college, but added that he had never spoken to the plaintiff, directly or indirectly, at any time.However, he opined that justice must also be seen to be done, to ensure that trust in the justice system continues. Judge Rai added that he has no personal interest in this case, but that it would be appropriate to submit a request to the Principal City Civil Sessions Judge to transfer the defamation case to another court as per Section 13(2)(b) of the Bangalore City Civil Courts Act, 1979. He added that a formal letter has also been submitted with this request. .Kumar, the Secretary of the Sri Manjunathaswamy temple and institutions in Dharmasthala, had filed a defamation suit recently, seeking to block 8,842 online links, including 4,140 YouTube videos, 932 Facebook posts, 3,584 Instagram posts, 108 news articles, 37 Reddit posts and 41 tweets, which he claimed were defamatory. This content was related to allegations made by a sanitation worker who claimed that he had buried several bodies in Dharmasthala. A Special Investigation Team (SIT) is presently probing a criminal case registered in the matter. Kumar had argued that although there were no criminal charges filed against him in the matter, false and defamatory statements were being made online and in the media against his family and the Dharmasthala Temple and institutions.On July 18, Judge Vijay Kumar Rai had issued an ex parte interim injunction restraining the publication of any such content on digital, social or print media till further hearing. Notably, this order was challenged by a Kannada YouTube Channel named Third Eye before the Supreme Court, which refused to directly entertain the matter and directed that it be pursued before the Karnataka High Court first. Thereafter, another YouTube channel named Kudla Rampage challenged the gag order before the High Court. On August 1, the High Court quashed the media gag imposed on Kudla Rampage.