Karnataka CM Siddaramaiah orders review to restrict RSS meetings on government school, college and public lands after minister Priyank Kharge receives threat calls. Read the full 600-word report on policy, legal questions, public reaction and political stakes.
On October 15, 2025, Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah directed the state chief secretary to examine measures to restrict Rastriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) activities on government and government-aided premises, marking a potentially significant policy shift in how public spaces are used for political and social mobilisation. The decision follows a formal request from state minister Priyank Kharge, who urged the government to bar RSS events on government schools, colleges, state temples and other state-owned lands — a move modelled on recent actions taken by Tamil Nadu.
Siddaramaiah framed the review as a response to public interest and order, saying no organisation should be allowed to “disturb the people” on public land. The chief minister’s instruction to the chief secretary begins an administrative process to assess existing rules, precedents and the practicalities of enforcement. While the government has not announced a formal ban, the order signals that Karnataka is evaluating whether to limit the use of government property for partisan or ideological activities. The review is notable because it brings into focus the fine balance between freedom of assembly and the state’s duty to preserve neutrality in public institutions.
The controversy escalated after minister Priyank Kharge publicly campaigned for restrictions and reported multiple threat calls following his letter to the chief minister. Kharge shared a video of an abusive call on his X account and said the calls, threats and intimidation have targeted him and his family over his stance. In his posts he clarified that his fight is directed at what he called a “toxic mentality” allegedly promoted through RSS activities in public schools, and not against individuals. Kharge’s account of sustained intimidation has added urgency to the government’s review and raised concerns about political polarisation and safety of public servants.
Legal and administrative questions will be central to the review. Restricting any organisation from government lands raises constitutional considerations about freedom of speech and assembly, equal treatment, and the correct application of state property rules. Officials are likely to examine the Tamil Nadu approach — where state authorities moved to prohibit ideological activities on government premises — and weigh whether similar executive orders, departmental circulars or legislative guidelines are required in Karnataka. Practical enforcement mechanisms — such as approvals for use of grounds, notice requirements and penalties for unauthorised gatherings — will also be evaluated.
