- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10870 WP No. 3991 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 3991 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. VENKATESHAMMA, W/O LATE C. MARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, 2. SRI. M. VENKATAREDDY, S/O LATE C. MARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/AT YELUVAHALLI VILLAGE, VIJAYAPURA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 135. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. CHOKKAREDDY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CENTRAL ZONE, CUNNIGHAM ROAD, CHALUKYA CIRCLE, BANGALORE - 560 052. Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10870 WP No. 3991 of 2025 3. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CUNNIGHAM ROAD, CHALUKYA CIRCLE, BANGALORE - 560 052. 4. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, CHALUKYA CIRCLE, BANGALORE - 560 052. 5. POLICE INSPECTOR VIJAYAPURA POLICE STATION, VIJAYAPURA, DEVANHALLI TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 135. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAHUL CARIAPPA, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SEC. 528 OF BNSS ACT PRAYING TO 1) DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3, 4 AND 5 TO CONSIDER THE COMPLAINT AS ANNEXURE A, C AND C-1 AND D DATED 14.08.2024 AND 28.08.2024, 03.09.2024 FOR PROVIDING POLICE PROTECTION IN RESPECT OF SY.NO.33 MEASURING 1 ACRE 17 GUNTAS, OF YELUVAHALLI VILLAGE, VIJAYAPURA HOBLI, DEVANAALLI TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BY ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION, AS PER THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 14/11/2018 IN 1.1 AND 1.2 AS ANNEXURE-M IN CRM-3/105/2018 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10870 WP No. 3991 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioners are before this Court, seeking the following prayers: "a) Issue writ of mandamus or any direction to the Respondent No.3, 4 & 5 to consider the complaint as Annexure-A, C & C-1 & D dated:14-08-2024 and 28- 08-2024, 03-09-2024 for providing police protection in respect of Sy.No.33 measuring 1 acre 17 guntas, of Yeluvanahalli Village, Vijayapura hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, Bangalore Rural district, by allowing the Writ petition, as per the circular issued by the 1st Respondent on 14- 11-2018 in 1.1 & 1.2-as Annexure-M in CRM- 3/105/2018 b) To issue direction to 5th Respondent to register the complaint as Annexure-A dated 14/08/24 as per the guidelines of supreme court in Lalitha Kumari Vs State of Uttara Pradesh. 2013 (8)supreme-1. c) to grant such other reliefs and deems fit under facts and circumstances of the case by allowing the Writ petition, in the interest of justice and equity. 2. Heard Sri. Chokkareddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri. Rahul Cariappa, learned AGA appearing for the respondents and have perused the material on record. 3. The petitioners institute O.S.No.365/2024 and the concerned Court, by its order dated 22.08.2024, grants an injunction against the defendants interference into the property of the petitioners. After the grant of injunction, it transpires - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10870 WP No. 3991 of 2025 that the defendants therein are again causing certain disturbance. The petitioners then submit representations to the jurisdictional police seeking police protection for the protection of the property. That having not been considered, has driven these petitioners to this Court in the subject petition. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are in possession of the property, the injunction is granted noticing the fact that they are in possession of the suit schedule property and the Tahsildar on 11.02.2025 has also caused an inspection and drawn a report that the petitioners are in possession of the property. 5. Learned AGA however would dispute all the three instances contending that the petitioners are not in possession of the property while the police cannot either given possession or take away possession, it is the power of the Court. The only issue is whether the police protection should be accorded to the petitioners for the purpose for which it is sought or not. 6. The Circular dated 14.11.2018 issued by the State mandates that a person who has an injunction order in his - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:10870 WP No. 3991 of 2025 favour has a right to enforce the said injunction by way of seeking police protection. 7. Therefore, the police now cannot say that they would not grant protection for the purpose of protection of the property in terms of the order of injunction and bearing in mind the conditions stipulated or the guidelines laid down in the Circular dated 14.11.2018. 8. The assessment of the threat in real time and in terms of the order of the concerned Court, the police shall accord such police protection, as sought by the petitioners. With the aforesaid observations, the petition stands disposed. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE SJK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37 CT: BHK