Back
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
M. NAGAPRASANNA, J
SRI MOHAN KUMAR A. – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of writ petitions and commonality of petitions. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. factual basis and procedural history of the cases. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. arguments for and against the prosecution of police officers. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. court's observations on prior judgments and implications for police action. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. legal requirements for sanction under sections 197 and 19. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 6. decision on the petitions and implications for future proceedings. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 7. court's final order and rejections of petitions. (Para 22) |
CAV ORDER
The petitioner, in all the writ petitions, is common. The prayer that is sought in these cases is seeking sanction to prosecute certain Police Officers of different ranks. Therefore, the prayer that is sought is also common. Facts that lead to filing of these petitions are different in each case. Notwithstanding commonality, I deem it appropriate to deal with the issue petition by petition.
WRIT PETITIOIN NO.28337 of 2024
2. This petition calls in question communications dated 13-08-2024 and 07-10-2024 and seeks a consequential mandamus directing reconsideration of the representation of the petition
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
