- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:588 WP No. 8085 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 8085 OF 2021 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. KONKALA RENUKA W/O.LATE DAYANANDA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT NEAR NARIGA PANCHAIYITHI, NERIGA POST, NERIGA VILLAGE, SRAJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, PIN 562 125. 2. D.YOGANANDA REDDY S/O LATE DAYANANDA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS, R/A NEAR NARIGA PANCHAIYITHI, NERIGA POST, NERIGA VILLAGE, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, PIN-562 125. REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT.KONKALA RENUKA. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MAHESHA.P., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. POLICE INSPECTOR, SARJAPUR P.S, BANGALORE-562 125. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, MILLAR'S ROAD, VASANTHNAGAR, BANGALORE-560 052. Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:588 WP No. 8085 of 2021 3. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (DGP), NO.6, NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001. 4. HOME MINISTER, VIDHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDI, BANGALORE-560 001. 5. K.N.MOHAN REDDY S/O LATE NARAYANA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/A 77, VARTHUR WARD, KARUNAYAKANA HALLI, NARASAPURA HOBLI, MALUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT-517 247. 6. PRASAD REDDY S/O LATE K.G.F.KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/A NO.182, 9TH CROSS, SHETTER 7, H.S.R.LAYOUT, BBMP, BANGALORE-560 102. 7. LOKESH REDDY S/O LATE RAMASWAMY REDDY, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT NERIGA VILLAGE, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT-517 247. RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 4 ARE REPRESENTED BY GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BANGALORE-560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR., AGA FOR R1 TO 4) - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:588 WP No. 8085 of 2021 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, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Mahantesh Shettar., AGA for the respondents 1 to 4 has appeared in person. 2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking following reliefs: I. Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ to direct the respondent to restore the possession of the schedule property along with all the articles belonging to the petitioners in possession of the said respondents. II. Direct the respondent police to provide proper protection to the petitioners considering the fact that the respondent persons are powerful and influential persons who have threatened the petitioners with severe consequences if she tries to enter the schedule premises and that since the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:588 WP No. 8085 of 2021 petitioner No.1 is a widowed woman and a single mother, it is important to provide her with proper police protection to prevent her from suffering further harassment at the hands of respondent. III. Restrain the respondents into entering into the suit schedule property. 3. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. 4. A perusal of the petition averments and the reliefs sought by the petitioner depicts that it is civil in nature and the same cannot be adjudicated under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The law is well settled that the disputed question of fact cannot be investigated under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Hence, I decline to exercise power under writ jurisdiction. 5. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 3 Sl No.: 19