IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 6190 OF 2026 (GM-POLICE)

BETWEEN:

1. SRI. PRAJWAL S, S/O SHIVA KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/AT NO.26, 2^ND CROSS, 2^ND MAIN, ATTIGUPPE, BENGALURU NORTH, BENGALURU - 560 040.

2. SMT. TRISHA S, D/O SURYA PRAKASH, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, R/AT 80, 2^ND CROSS, 2^ND MAIN, CAUVERY LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 040.

Digitally signed …PETITIONERS by SHARADAVANI (BY SRI. MOHANKUMAR D, ADVOCATE)

B Location: HIGH AND:

COURT OF KARNATAKA

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 01.

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

2. SHO CHANDRA LAYOUT, CHANDRA LAYOUT POLICE STATION, ADDRESS 2^ND CROSS, BHASAVESHWARA, HBCS LAYOUT 2ND STAGE, CHANDRA LAYOUT, ATTIGUPPE, BENGALURU - 560 040.

3. SHO GOVINDRAJNAGAR, GOVINDRAJNAGAR POLICE STATION, ADDRESS SARASATHI NAGAR, HUCHAPPA LAYOUT, GOVINDARAJNAGAR WARD, VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 040.

4. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, ADDRESS NO.2, ALI ASKAR ROAD, VASANTH NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 002.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.P. YOGANNA, AGA)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 19.02.2026 WHEREIN THE PETITIONER HAS SOUGHT FOR ADEQUATE POLICE PROTECTION VIDE ANNEXURE - A ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

ORAL ORDER

The captioned writ petition is filed seeking a direction to respondent No.2 to consider the representation submitted by the petitioners dated 19.02.2026, produced at Annexure–A, and to extend adequate police protection to petitioners No.1 and 2 so as to enable them to solemnize their marriage by way of a registered marriage. The grievance of the petitioners is that though the said representation has been forwarded to respondent No.2 through Registered Post Acknowledgement Due (RPAD), no action has been taken by the jurisdictional police authorities and the representation has not been considered till date.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. Perused the material placed on record.

3. The pleadings in the writ petition reveal that petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.2 have been in a relationship for the past five years. It is their specific case that their relationship was disclosed to their respective family members; however, both families have strongly opposed the proposed marriage on the ground that the petitioners belong to different castes. It is further averred that the parents and relatives of the petitioners are unwilling to accept their relationship and are attempting to prevent them from entering into matrimony. Apprehending interference and possible threats from their family members, the petitioners have approached the jurisdictional police authorities by submitting a representation seeking police protection to enable them to solemnize their marriage. As the representation has not elicited any response from the police authorities, the petitioners are constrained to approach this Court seeking appropriate directions.

4. The learned Additional Government Advocate, on instructions, submits that though the petitioners claim to have sent the representation through RPAD, if the petitioners submit a physical copy of the representation before respondent No.2, the said authority would examine the grievance of the petitioners in accordance with law and take appropriate steps to ensure that the petitioners are not subjected to any threat or interference while exercising their right to solemnize their marriage.

5. Recording the submission made by the learned Additional Government Advocate, this Court proceeds to pass the following order:

ORDER i. The writ petition is disposed of;

ii. The petitioners are reserved liberty to appro