- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5235 WP No. 18552 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 18552 OF 2017 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. VIJAYAKRISHNA MAJOR, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, S/O NARAYANAPPA, SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TRAFFIC -II, HASSAN CITY-573 201. 2. SRI.HARISH AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, S/O MARILINGEGOWDA.B.H., POLICE CONSTABLE, PRESENTLY WORKING AS WRITER, ALUR CIRCLE INSPECTOR OFFICE, ALUR, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 201. 3. MADHU AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, S/O SHIVANNA, POLICE CONSTABLE, PRESENTLY WORKING AT ARSIKERE POLICE INSPECTOR (RURAL OFFICE), HASSAN DISTRICT-573 201. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SATHISHA.D.J., ADVOCATE FOR P1 [ABSENT]) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5235 WP No. 18552 of 2017 VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. KARNATAKA STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, BANGALORE-560 001. BY ITS REGISTRAR. 3. SRI RANGEGOWDA @ THAMMANNA, S/O LATE SRI THIMMEGOWDA, AGE: 48 YEARS, RANGANATHA ENTERPRISES, BUDDHA MARG, ADJACENT TO HDCC BANK, VIDYANAGAR, HASSAN-573 201. 4. RAJU @ HANUMEGOWDA S/O THIMMEGOWDA, AGE:41 YEARS, RAJU DIARY, BEHIND RAMAKRISHNA VIDYALAYA, GOWRIKOPPALU, HASSAN-573 201. 5. DIRECTOR GENERAL AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BANGALORE -560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA RAYAPPA., AGA FOR R1 & 5; SRI. V.VINAYGIRI., ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI. B.RAJASUBRAHMANYA BHAT., ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI. PRAKASH.M.PATIL., ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5235 WP No. 18552 of 2017 ORAL ORDER When the case is called, petitioner No.1 is not represented. When the case is listed and called out, the advocate must be present. The absence may affect the case. Sri.Manjunatha Rayappa., AGA for respondents 1 and 5, Sri.Vidur Nair., counsel on behalf of Sri.V.Vinaygiri., for respondent No.2, Sri.B.Rajasubrahmanya., counsel for respondent No.3 and Sri.Prakash M.Patil., counsel for respondent No.4 have appeared in person. This Court vide order dated:18.08.2023 had dismissed the petition as far as petitioners 2 and 3 are concerned. As far as petitioner No.1 is concerned, there is no representation on behalf of petitioner No.1. The petition is filed in the year 2017. Now we are in the month of February 2025. It's pending for almost eight years. As already noted above, when the case is called, petitioner No.1 is not represented. It appears that petitioner No.1 is not interested in prosecuting the petition. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP List No.: 2 Sl No.: 16