Karnataka High Court Judge Refers to Muslim Locality in Bengaluru as “Pakistan,” Video Viral
The video of this statement has since gone viral across social media platforms, sparking a wave of criticism from various sections of society.
Bengaluru: A recent remark by Karnataka High Court Justice Vedavyasachar Srishananda, where he referred to a Muslim-majority area in Bengaluru as “Pakistan,” has ignited widespread outrage and condemnation.
The comment was made during a court hearing when the judge mentioned Gori Palya, a neighborhood in west Bengaluru, in a manner that has raised serious concerns about communal bias.
While discussing the locality, Justice Srishananda said, “Go to Mysore Road flyover, every auto-rickshaw has 10 people. It’s not applicable because the head of the Mysore flyover leading to the market from Gori Palya is in Pakistan, not in India.This is the reality. No matter how strict a police officer you put there, they will be beaten up.”
The video of this statement has since gone viral across social media platforms, sparking a wave of criticism from various sections of society.
Many have expressed shock and disbelief, pointing out the inappropriate nature of such a comment coming from a sitting judge, whose role is rooted in upholding constitutional values.
Bengaluru-based activist Brinda Adige was one of the prominent voices condemning the statement. She remarked, “This is absolutely unacceptable behavior from a judge, whose position demands respectful and neutral language. Why is such an unfit individual still holding office in the Karnataka High Court? He is a government servant, entrusted with powers by our Constitution. He must be suspended.”
Echoing similar sentiments, Advocate Sanjoy Ghose expressed his dismay, stating, “It is astonishing that a judge of an Indian Constitutional Court would refer to fellow citizens of a different faith as Pakistani.”
The video continues to circulate widely online, with people questioning not only the appropriateness of the judge’s words but also the broader implications of such statements in a diverse and pluralistic society like India.
Although the context or the exact date of the remarks remains unclear, the comment has already triggered a significant debate on judicial impartiality and communal sensitivity.
This incident is likely to fuel further discussions about the role of the judiciary in maintaining communal harmony and whether there should be accountability mechanisms for comments that can inflame communal tensions.
