The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday (October 12, 2026) stayed an investigation into an FIR filed against BJP leader Dr Ravi Basalingappagowda Patil and two others over allegations that they attempted to delete the names of 198 Muslim voters from the voter list during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process in Belagavi. The FIR, based on a complaint filed by a Congress party block agent, reportedly alleged that Patil and others submitted fabricated Form 7 applications to remove Muslim voters from electoral rolls during the SIR.
Justice Venkatesh Naik T, at the Dharwad Bench of the High Court, passed the interim order in line with a coordinate Bench’s decision in similar matters on October 9, 2026. Justice Naik relied on the coordinate Bench’s reasoning that raising such a grievance might be premature, as the electoral authorities had not yet adjudicated the objections.
“The coordinate Bench had stayed the investigation in similar matters on 09.10.2026. The perusal of the aforesaid order and the facts and circumstances involved in the present case are similar. In view of maintaining judicial discipline, it is just and proper to stay the investigation till the next date of hearing,” the Court said. “The respondent-State is permitted to file an application for modification of the order if necessary…” the Court added.
Senior Advocate M Aruna Shyam, appearing for the petitioners, submitted before the court that Patil and others were falsely implicated by their political rivals. He sought a stay on the investigation against the petitioners, arguing that a parallel investigation by police was not permissible under the law.
Shyam pointed out before the court that the Election Commission had issued a notification permitting bulk Form No. 7 objections, and that the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) was yet to adjudicate upon them. Therefore, until the ERO adjudicates on the objections, the allegations levelled against the petitioners cannot be raised.
He added that after the ERO’s adjudication, if any suspicion is raised, then only Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act could be invoked against the petitioners. Notably, the provision penalises making false written statements or declarations in connection with the preparation, revision, or correction of an electoral roll, or the inclusion or exclusion of any entry.
Earlier, Patil was granted anticipatory bail by a Sessions Court in Belagavi, which noted that mere submission of Form 7 did not automatically trigger the legal action. The FIR against Patil and others was lodged at the Market Police Station, Belagavi, under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 336(4), 353, 61(2), 3(5), 3(7), and 192 read with Section 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
