<p>The High Court of Karnataka on Wednesday dismissed the petition challenging the ban on the Popular Front of India (PFI) and its immediate enforcement. </p>.<p>Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed the petition filed by Nasir Pasha against the union government's notification declaring the PFI and its associates and affiliates to be an unlawful organisation under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and bringing the notification into force with immediate effect. </p>.<p>Justice Nagaprasanna noted that under Article 19 (4), the government can impose reasonable restrictions on the right to form associations, unions or cooperative societies under Article 19 (1)(c). </p>.<p>The notification dated September 28, 2022, stated that several associates, affiliates or fronts of the PFI have been indulging in terrorist activities in Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Karnataka. The notification, issued under Section 3 of the UAPA, has been referred to the tribunal constituted under Section 4 of the Act which is pending consideration. </p>.<p>Pasha, who claimed to be the president of the PFI, contended that separate reasons had to be recorded in writing to bring the notification into effect immediately. He also stated that fundamental rights cannot be taken away with the stroke of a pen. </p>.<p>The court noted that the union government was empowered under the proviso, subsection (3) of section 3, to bring in any notification declaring any organisation to be unlawful with immediate effect. In the court's opinion, the notification has two parts: the reason for declaring the organisation illegal and the provision for it to take effect immediately. </p>.<p>"Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India on which much emphasis is laid is also hedged with reasonable restrictions to be imposed in certain circumstances under Article 19(4) of the Constitution of India. Therefore, in the light of the judgment rendered by the High Court of Delhi in the case of the Islamic Research Foundation, which was considering the case of Mohammad Jafar rendered by the apex court, and the fact that reasons are found in the impugned notification itself, I do not find any warrant that would entail interference at the hands of this court," the court said.</p>
<p>The High Court of Karnataka on Wednesday dismissed the petition challenging the ban on the Popular Front of India (PFI) and its immediate enforcement. </p>.<p>Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed the petition filed by Nasir Pasha against the union government's notification declaring the PFI and its associates and affiliates to be an unlawful organisation under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and bringing the notification into force with immediate effect. </p>.<p>Justice Nagaprasanna noted that under Article 19 (4), the government can impose reasonable restrictions on the right to form associations, unions or cooperative societies under Article 19 (1)(c). </p>.<p>The notification dated September 28, 2022, stated that several associates, affiliates or fronts of the PFI have been indulging in terrorist activities in Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Karnataka. The notification, issued under Section 3 of the UAPA, has been referred to the tribunal constituted under Section 4 of the Act which is pending consideration. </p>.<p>Pasha, who claimed to be the president of the PFI, contended that separate reasons had to be recorded in writing to bring the notification into effect immediately. He also stated that fundamental rights cannot be taken away with the stroke of a pen. </p>.<p>The court noted that the union government was empowered under the proviso, subsection (3) of section 3, to bring in any notification declaring any organisation to be unlawful with immediate effect. In the court's opinion, the notification has two parts: the reason for declaring the organisation illegal and the provision for it to take effect immediately. </p>.<p>"Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India on which much emphasis is laid is also hedged with reasonable restrictions to be imposed in certain circumstances under Article 19(4) of the Constitution of India. Therefore, in the light of the judgment rendered by the High Court of Delhi in the case of the Islamic Research Foundation, which was considering the case of Mohammad Jafar rendered by the apex court, and the fact that reasons are found in the impugned notification itself, I do not find any warrant that would entail interference at the hands of this court," the court said.</p>
