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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 34236

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
SRI. KRISHNEGOWDA – Appellant
Versus
THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY – Respondent
WP 3760/2024



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 3760 OF 2024 (GM-POLICE)

BETWEEN:

SRI. KRISHNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS S/O LATE KALASEGOWDA R/AT CHOLLENAHALY BILIKERE HOBLI HUNSUR TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT - 571103 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B S NAGARAJ., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE - 560001.

Digitally signed 2. THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY by SHWETHA DEPARTMENT OF HOME RAGHAVENDRA GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA Location: HIGH COURT OF VIDHANA SOUDHA KARNATAKA DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE - 560001.

3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AND ALSO INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE KARNATAKA STATE GOVERNMENT NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560001.

4. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE KARNATAKA STATE GOVERNMENT SOUTH ZONE, MYSURU, MYSURU - 570001.

5. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE MYSURU DISTRICT, MYSURU - 570001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT K P YASHODHA, AGA FOR RESPONDENTS)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR DIRECTION OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER DIRECT THE R1 PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, R2, ADDL. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, R3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, AND ALSO INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, R4. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, (SOUTH ZONE) KARNATAKA STATE GOVERNMENT, AND R5, SUPERINTENDED OF POLICE, MYSURU DISTRICT, TO CONSIDER HIS APPLICATION DATED 26/10/2023 FOR GRANT OF PERMISSION TO (FILE A CRIMINAL CASE) TO INITIATE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS, I.E. TO FILE A PRIVATE COMPLAINT AGAINST ONE MR LAVA, WHO IS WORKING AS POLICE INSPECTOR OF KRISHNARAJA NAGAR, POLICE STATION. THE COPIES OF THE SAID APPLICATION DATED 26/10/2023 MADE TO THE R1 TO 5 ARE SUBMITTED RESPECTIVELY HEREWITH AT ANNEXURE-A, A1, A2, A3 AND A4 AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

ORAL ORDER

1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

i. Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or direction or any other appropriate writ or order directing the Respondent No.1. Principal Secretary; Resp. No. 2. Addl, Principal Secretary, Resp. No 3. The Director General of Police, and also Inspector General of Police, Resp. No 4. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, (South Zone) Karnataka State Government, and Respondent No.5, Superintended of Police, Mysuru District, to consider his application dated 26.10.2023 for grant of Permission to (file a Criminal case) to initiate criminal Proceedings, i.e.to file a Private Complaint against one M.R. Lava, who is working as Police Inspector at Krishnaraja Nagar, Police station. The copies of the said application dated 26.10.2023 made to the Respondent No.1 to 5 are submitted respectively herewith at Annexure – A, A1, A2 A3 & A4;

ii. Pass such other order as this Hon'ble court deems fit under the circumstances of the case and;

iii. Allow this writ petition with cost in the interest of justice and equity.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the request made by the petitioner to the respondents seeking for sanction to prosecute one Mr.M.R.Lava who was a Police Inspector at Krishnaraja Nagar, Police Station has not been considered by the respondents.

3. Whenever any application for such grant of sanction to prosecute a Police Officer is made, it is required for the respondents to consider the same and pass necessary orders after examining the allegations made and if the allegations do not support any such grant of sanction to reject the same with valid reasons. Of course, while granting an order of sanction also the same would have to be accompanied by reasons.

4. The representation of the petitioner not having been considered, I pass the following;

ORDER

i. The writ petition is allowed ii. A mandamus is issued, respondents are dire

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top