- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5199 WP No. 104420 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M.G.UMA WRIT PETITION NO.104420 OF 2017 (SCST) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. YALLAVVA W/O. SANGAPPA PUJAR, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, CHANDAN COLONY, NEAR ANAND NAGAR, HALE HUBBALLI, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD. 2. SMT.SAROJA W/O. YAMANAPPA GOSAVI, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, CHANDAN COLONY, NEAR ANAND NAGAR, OLD HUBBALLI, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD. …PETITIONERS (BY SHRI HEMANTHKUMAR L. HAVARAGI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER/THE PRESIDENT, DISTRICT, PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES OF SCHEDULE CASTE AND SCHEDULE TRIBES DHARWAD DISTRICT, DHARWAD. 4. THE TAHASHILDAR/THE PRESIDENT TALUKA, PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES OF SCHEDULE CASTE AND SCHEDULE TRIBES, Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5199 WP No. 104420 of 2017 HUBBALLI TALUKA, DHARWAD DISTRICT. 5. THE COMMISSIONER HUBBALLI-DHARAWD POLICE COMMISSION, NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI, DISTRICT DHARWAD. 6. THE ASSISTANT POLICE COMMISSIONER HUBBALLI-DHARWAD POLICE COMMISSION JURISDICTION OF OLD HUBBALLI POLICE STATION, OLD HUBBALLI, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD. 7. POLICE INSPECTOR, OLD HUBBALLI POLICE STATION, OLD HUBBALLI, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD. 8. POLICE-SUB INSPECTOR, OLD HUBBALLI POLICE STATION, OLD HUBBALLI, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD. 9. THE ADDL. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER/ ADDL. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE (SPECIAL OFFICER), DHARWAD DISTRICT, DHARWAD. …RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI P.N.HATTI, HCGP) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE : a) A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 2 TO DISCHARGE THE DUTY TO REGISTER F.I.R. AGAINST RESPONDENT NO.3 TO 9 UNDER SECTION 154 OF Cr.P.C. FOR PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE SCHEDULE CASTE AND SCHEDULE TRIBE (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989. b) A WRIT IN THE NAUTRE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO.7 TO 8 TO DISCHARGE THE DUTY TO REGISTER F.I.R AGAINST THE ALLEGED PERSONS UNDER SECTION 154 OF Cr.P.C. FOR PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 3(1)(iv), 3(1)(v), 3(2)(vii) OF THE SCHEDULE CASTE AND SCHEDULE TRIBE (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5199 WP No. 104420 of 2017 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M.G.UMA ORAL ORDER Petitioners have approached this Court seeking issuance of writ in the nature of Mandamus directing respondent Nos.1 and 2 to register FIR against respondent Nos.3 to 9 under Section 154 of Cr.P.C., for the offence punishable under Section 4 of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (‘SC/ST Act’ for short) and also to direct respondent No.7 to 8 to register FIR against alleged persons punishable under Section 3(1)(iv), 3(1)(v) and 3(2)(vii) of SC/ST Act. 2. Heard Shri Hemanthkumar L. Havaragi, learned counsel for petitioners and Shri P.N.Hatti, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondents - State. Perused the materials on record. 3. Petitioners have made serious allegations against respondents that no FIR came to be registered - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5199 WP No. 104420 of 2017 against respondent Nos.1 and 2 and 7 to 8, and therefore his is before this Court. 4. Even though leaned counsel for the petitioners contends that, the first information as per Annexure-E is filed before the respondents, Annexure-D discloses that immediately after receipt of said first information, the Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, Old Hubballi, Police Station, registered the FIR No.89/2017 against accused Nos.1 to 9 for the offence under Section 143, 147, 427, 447, 448, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioners is not in a position to highlight as to why they have approached this Court. Under such circumstances, I am of the opinion that, the petition is casually filed without any merits. 5. The order dated 23.08.2024 reads as under: “Sri.Hemanth Kumar.L.Havaragi., learned counsel for the petitioners has appeared through video conferencing and submits that short accommodation may be granted. This Court is not inclined to grant time. The reason is simple. The petition is filed in the year 2017. Now we are in the month of August 2024. The petition is pending for seven years. However, in the interest of - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5199 WP No. 104420 of 2017 justice and as a last chance, time is granted subject to payment of cost of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred only) to Advocates’ Clerks Association, High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad. Matter is adjourned. It is made clear that the petitioners will have right of audience only if the cost is paid.” 6. Accordingly, the costs of Rs.500/- is never deposited by the learned counsel for the petitioners. In spite of that, when the learned counsel for the petitioner was asked to address his arguments, he is not in a position to substantiate any of the contention raised in the writ petition. Hence, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (M.G.UMA) JUDGE EM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4