City
Epaper

High Court stays Rs 500 betting case against Karnataka Home Minister Parameshwara

By IANS | Updated: April 23, 2026 21:45 IST

Bengaluru, April 23 The Karnataka High Court on Thursday granted a stay on the Rs 500 betting case ...

Open in App

Bengaluru, April 23 The Karnataka High Court on Thursday granted a stay on the Rs 500 betting case against Home Minister G. Parameshwara.

A special court here had earlier ordered the registration of an FIR against Parameshwara in connection with allegations that he placed a Rs 500 bet during a kabaddi match.

Taking up the matter, the High Court bench of Justice Sunil Dutt Yadav questioned whether a case could be registered even for a casual or humorous remark.

Also noting that the statement did not appear to have been made with deliberate intent, the bench held that an explanation should have been sought from the police before ordering an investigation. It has stayed the proceedings in the case and adjourned further hearing.

The special court on Tuesday ordered the registration of a First Information Report against Parameshwara over an allegation that he placed a Rs 500 bet during a Kabaddi sports tournament.​

Taking serious note of the development and the message it would send to society, the court directed the Kodigehalli police in Tumakuru to register an FIR and carry out a comprehensive probe into the matter.​

The directive came on a private complaint filed by H.R. Nagabhushan, who argued that even a small bet made or publicly acknowledged by a person holding a constitutional position amounts to promoting an illegal activity.

In response to the court order, Parameshwara said that his remarks have been misinterpreted and that he respects the legal process.

Talking to reporters here, he had said it was not appropriate to comment extensively on the issue. He clarified that his earlier statement was made casually in the context of a kabaddi game, in a light-hearted manner similar to how people speak in rural settings.

“The context in which I spoke is very important. If I had promoted betting, that would have been wrong. But I am in a responsible position; it is completely false to say that I promoted betting,” he said.

He added that interpretations of his statement were being taken out of context and stressed that he had not encouraged or supported betting in any form.

Referring to the legal development, the minister said a private individual had approached the court in the matter and that neither he nor his office had received any notice before the court’s order.

"No notice was served to us. If we had received a notice, we could have explained the context and requested that they not take it seriously. But no notice came; suddenly an order was passed," he said.

Parameshwara further stated that he respects the law and would examine the court order in detail before taking any further steps. “I have not fully understood the order yet. I will look into it,” he added.

Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor

Open in App

Related Stories

Other SportsIPL 2026: 'I would dedicate this win to Mukesh,' says Gaikwad as CSK beat MI

InternationalIndia-US ties face trust deficit, need reset

Cricket"All glory to him, we all wanted to be there for him": CSK skipper Gaikwad hails Mukesh's courage after personal tragedy

CricketSachin Tendulkar turns 53: A look at his remarkable career of unmatched numbers and milestones

EntertainmentOscar-winning 'Godfather' production designer Dean Tavoularis passes away at 93, director Francis Ford Coppola pays tribute

National Realted Stories

National3 FIRs filed over misleading social media posts on Char Dham Yatra; monitoring stepped up

NationalOdisha CM calls public servants ‘face of govt’, hands over 4,623 job letters

NationalOdisha issues SOP for safety of census staff amid heatstroke, assault concerns

NationalGujarat: Iron rod theft racket busted in Surat, 4 held

NationalCabinet sub-committee to decide next course of action in Kaleshwaram case