1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 30^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA

WRIT PETITION No.21440 OF 2022 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

NASIR PASHA

S/O. LATE MOHAMMED HASHAM,

AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,

R/AT NO.519, 11^TH CROSS,

PILLANNA GARDEN,

3^RD STAGE, BENGALURU 3 560 045,

(PETITIONER IS IN JC)

REPRESENTED BY HIS WIFE

ARSHIYA FATHIMA

... PETITIONER

(BY SRI JAYAKUMAR S.PATIL, ADVOCATE A/W

SRI MOHAMMED TAHIR, ADVOCATES)

AND:

UNION OF INDIA

REPRESENTED BY

THE ADDL. SECRETARY,

MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS,

NORTH BLOCK,

NEW DELHI 3 110 001.

... RESPONDENT

(BY SRI TUSHAR MEHTA, SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA A/W

SRI M.B.NARGUND, ADDITIONAL SOLICITOR GENERAL AND

R

2

SRI H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH AND SET ASIDE THE

DECLARATION NOTIFICATION TO THE EXTENT OF IMMEDIATE

EFFECT OF IMPUGNED DECLARATION NOTIFICATION BEARING

NO.CG-DL-E-28092022-239179

VIDE

DTD.28.09.2022

AT

ANNEXURE-A ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS (MHA)

NEW DELHI.

THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED

FOR ORDERS ON 28.11.2022, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT

THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

ORDER

The petitioner calls in question a declaration notification dated

28-09-2022 issued by the respondent declaring Popular Front of

India (8PFI9 for short) to be an unlawful organization and bringing

into force the notification with immediate effect.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts in brief, are as

follows:-

The petitioner claims to be the President of PFI organization

and claims that the said organization is registered under the

Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960. He further claims to be

3

working for the empowerment of down trodden section of the

Society. What brings the petitioner to this Court is declaration of

PFI to be an unlawful organization. The petitioner, by virtue of

being a member of the organization claims to be aggrieved by the

action of declaring the organization to be unlawful. Insofar as

declaration of the organization to be unlawful under Section 3 of the

Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (8the Act9 for short), the

issue has been referred to the Tribunal constituted under Section 4

of the Act where it is pending consideration. What drives the

petitioner to this Court, at this juncture, is the act of the

respondent/Union of India in bringing the Notification of declaration

of PFI with immediate effect.

3. Heard Sri Jayakumar S.Patil, learned senior counsel

appearing for the petitioner and Sri Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor

General of India appearing for the respondent/Union of India.

4. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner would contend

that there was no warrant to bring the notification into operation

with immediate effect; there are no separate reasons recorded for

the said purpose; non-recording of reasons is violative of sub-

4

section (3) of Section 3 of the Act; the result of bringing the

notification into effect immediately results in declaration under

Sections 7, 8 and 10 of the Act and, therefore, is illegal. The

learned senior counsel would submit that a fundamental right under

Article 19(4) of the Constitution of India cannot be taken away in a

perfunctory manner without recording separate reasons for bringing

into effect the Notification with immediate effect. He would place

reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of

MOHAMMAD JAFAR v. UNION OF INDIA 3 1994 Supp (2) SCC

1.

5. On the other hand, the learned Solicitor General of India

Sri Tushar Mehta would seek to refute the submissions of the

learned senior counsel to contend that no reasons need be

recorded. Reasons must be available in the notification itself and

reasons, in fact, are available in the notification. The notification is

into two parts 3 one dec