- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3875 WP No. 22429 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 22429 OF 2021 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: HAJI GULAM MOHAMMAD S/O ABDUL REHMAN, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC: TRANSPORT BUSINESS, R/AT ZIYAN MANZIL, THALVAR THOTA, S.S.ROAD, UDUPI, KARNATAKA - 576 101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DINESHKUMAR RAO K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, OLD DC OFFICE ROAD, BANNANJE CIRCLE, BANNANJE, UDUPI - 576 101. 3. THE POLICE INSPECTOR, PADUBIDDERI POLICE STATION, KAPU CIRCLE, UDUPI DISTRICT, UDUPI - 576 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR., AGA) Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3875 WP No. 22429 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 IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Dineshkumar Rao.K., counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Mahantesh Shettar., AGA for the respondents have appeared in person. 2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari to quash the Endorsement dated 04.05.2021 issued by the second respondent vide Annexure-K and a Mandamus directing the second respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for providing security person/ gunman as per the request letter dated 05.02.2021 vide Annexure-J. 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. 4. The contention of the petitioner is that he is into a Transport business and he is into social service. He was also appointed as Vice Chairman, Minority Department, KPCC and - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:3875 WP No. 22429 of 2021 has also been appointed as Working Secretary of Kapu Vidhana Sabha Constitutency, KPCC (South). It is contended that he has a life threat and hence he had sought for Gunman. Initially he was accorded with Gunman free of cost. Later on, the Gunman service was extended on payment of fee. As the things stood thus, the service of the Gunman was withdrawn for non-payment of fee. Therefore, he was constrained to submit a representation for providing Gunman and the same was rejected by issuing an endorsement that he has no life threat. The endorsement is furnished along with the Writ Petition and the same is marked as Annexure-K. A perusal of the same reflect that the request of the petitioner is simply rejected on the ground that there is no life threat. Except for saying that on verification of records there is no life threat, nothing has been stated in the endorsement. A perusal of the representation would reflect that the petitioner has in detail narrated the reasons for seeking the service of Gunman. What was required to be considered by the department was whether the requirement of the petitioner for Gunman is necessary or not. This has not been done. Hence, this Court deems it proper to quash Annexure-K. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:3875 WP No. 22429 of 2021 5. The Writ of Certiorari is ordered. The Endorsement dated 04.05.2021 issued by the second respondent vide Annexure-K is quashed. The Department concerned is directed to reconsider the request of the petitioner to provide service of Gunman in accordance with the law. 6. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. If there is any due by the petitioner, the same shall be made good by him. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 3 Sl No.: 50