SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Kar) 2827

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
E.S.INDIRESH, J.
Lakshmi W/o Shri Selvaraju – Appellant
Versus
The State by Mahalakshmi Layout Police Station – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 4425 of 2017
Decided On : 07-11-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Rajesh Rao K.
For the Respondents: Mahantesh Shettar, P. Prasanna Kumar

Transfer of investigation to CBI requires exceptional circumstances; mere allegations against local police are insufficient for such action.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 307, 333, 353 and Section 25 of the Arms Act - Investigation transfer - Petitioner sought transfer of investigation regarding the encounter death of her son Ashik to the CBI - Court emphasized that transfer must occur only in rare and exceptional circumstances where justice demands. (Paras 9-14)

(B) CBI Investigation - The Court held that mere allegations against local police do not constitute sufficient grounds for transferring investigations and that such power must be exercised cautiously and not routinely. (Paras 9, 10)

(C) Fair Investigation - The independent CID report ruled that there was no basis for claims of bias against local authorities, and the existing investigation was deemed satisfactory. (Paras 14)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, mother of deceased Ashik, alleged wrongful killing by police during an encounter. Death occurred after Ashik attacked police personnel during an attempted arrest. FIR registered against him and co-accused for serious assaults. (Paras 1-3)

Findings of Court:
Court noted that an independent CID investigation provided satisfactory findings; therefore, CBI transfer not warranted. (Paras 14)

Issues: Consideration of whether there are grounds to transfer investigation to CBI due to alleged police misconduct. (Paras 6, 11)

Ratio Decidendi: Supreme Court guidelines stress the need for exceptional circumstances to transfer investigations to CBI, ruling that the existing investigation by local forces was adequate. (Paras 9-12)

Result: Writ petition dismissed as devoid of merits.

Table of Content
1. petitioner seeks cbi investigation for ashik's death. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. court hears arguments from both parties. (Para 4)
3. petitioner's counsel claims mistaken identity in shooting. (Para 5 , 6)
4. court outlines legal status and key facts. (Para 8)
5. conditions for cbi investigation outlined by supreme court. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
6. court concludes petition lacks merit for investigation transfer. (Para 12 , 14)

ORDER :

1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for a direction to the respondent No.1 in Crime Nos.272/2016 and 299/2016 and the respondent No.2 in Crime No.293/2016 to place the entire material pertaining to the death of late Ashik S/o the petitioner before the respondent No.6-Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI); inter alia sought for direction to the respondent No.6-CBI to conduct free, fair and impartial investigation pertaining to the encounter death of late Ashik S/o the petitioner and submit the report to the jurisdictional Court.

2. The facts in nutshell for the purpose of adjudication of this writ petition are that the petitioner is the mother of deceased Ashik. It is stated in the writ petition that, based on the statement of one Sri. Bharamappa, Police Inspector of Mahalakshmi Layout Police Station, Bengaluru, the complaint is lodged and F.I.R. registered in Crime No.293 of 2016 before the Jnanabharathi Police Station, Bengaluru City against three accused persons, alleging that, on 07th October, 2016 upon the credible information, the complainant-Police Inspector along with his sub-ordinate officers went to arrest the accused persons in Crime Nos.272/2016 and 299/2016 and as such, tried to caught hold of the accused persons namely, Santhosh and Arun. At that time, the said accused persons had tried to escape in the Swift Dezire car by dashing their car to other two to three vehicles and a Police vehicle, which resulted in injury to Woman Police Inspector Smt. Roopa Tambhada.

3. It is further stated in the writ petition that the Police have arrested the three accused in the aforementioned crime and on the statement made by the accused, respondent-Police came to know that, one Kulli Ramesha and deceased Ashik were involved in the commission of offence in Crime Nos.272/2016 and 299/2016. On the basis of the credible information, the Police Officers reached the Health Layout, situate at Annapoorneshwari Nagar and after, came to know about the same, the said Kulli Ramesh tried to attack a Police personnel with a Dragger and the deceased Ashik hit the complainant-Police Inspector Sri. Bharamappa with a sickle on the chest and on account of the same, the complainant got injured and there was bleeding from the chest. Immediately, in order to save his life and his team members, including the Women Sub-Inspector, the complainant took his service revolver and shot a gun fire on the head of deceased Ashik and on account of the same, Ashik fell down with bleeding injury. Later the Police called the Ambulance and rushed the accused- Ashik and the Women Police Inspector Smt. Roopa Tambhada to the nearest Hospital, wherein the deceased Ashik was declared dead. In this regard, F.I.R. was registered in Crime No.293/2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 307 , 333, 353 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of the Arms Act at Jnanabharati Police Station, Bengaluru. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent-Police have encountered resulting in death of her son Ashik and therefore, petitioner has sought for transfer of the investigation to the respondent No.6-CBI, by filing the present writ petition.

4. Heard Sri. Rajesh Rao K., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Sri. Mahantesh Shettar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 5 and Sri. P. Prasanna Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.6.

5. Sri. Rajesh Rao K., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner by referring to the statement mentioned in the F.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top