The Karnataka High Court has recently rejected a public interest litigation (PIL) petition challenging the inclusion of the names and pictures of the Chief Minister, Deputy Chief Minister, and other ministers in advertisements promoting two recently launched State government initiatives.
Chief Justice Prasanna B. Varale and Justice Krishna S. Dixit dismissed the argument that utilizing ministers’ photographs would burden the public treasury and thus violate the constitution, considering it to be an improbable assertion.
“We disagree with the claim that these advertisements result in exorbitant expenses and should, therefore, be prohibited. In life, whether of an individual or institutions, nothing is free,” the Court stated.
These remarks were made in response to the PIL filed by Right to Information (RTI) activist Bhimappa Gundappa Gadad regarding advertisements for the Gruha Lakshmi and Gruha Jyothi schemes.
While the Court did not find merit in the petition, it emphasized that the practice of including photographs in advertisements is unacceptable. It acknowledged the Supreme Court’s concerns expressed in the case of Common Cause vs. Union of India, where it was suggested that such photo use could foster a ‘personality cult’ and undermine democratic principles.
The division bench noted that the Supreme Court had not issued an absolute ban on such practices.
“We want to clarify that we do not endorse such an approach either. Ultimately, legal decisions cannot be treated as rigid mathematical theorems. They should be understood in the context of the specific circumstances from which the legal principles are derived.”
Furthermore, the Court pointed out that the advertisements in question did not feature extravagant or ostentatious photographs.
It was also observed that the petitioner had not alleged any violations of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, or Karnataka Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1981, which contain provisions governing advertisement regulation.
While dismissing the petition, the Court expressed optimism that better judgment would prevail “in the corridors of power.”
The Court concluded by stating, “We want to make it explicitly clear that the aforementioned statements should not be construed as the Court’s endorsement of the practice of featuring ministers’ photographs in government advertisements.”
