IRANNA S/O BASAVANNEPPA CHIKKERI v. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
WP/106439/2025 · 2025-09-24
Suraj Govindaraj
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 37546 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 37546 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13056 WP No. 106439 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 106439 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN:
IRANNA S/O. BASAVANNEPPA CHIKKERI, AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. NANDIHALLI VILLAGE, TQ. RANEBENNUR, DIST. HAVERI. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. N.R. KUPPELUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, HAVERI, DIST. HAVERI-581110. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR RANEBENNUR, TQ. RANEBENNUR, DIST. HAVERI-581110. 3. THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE HALAGERI PS, TQ. RANEBENNUR, DIST. HAVERI-581110. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHARAD V. MAGADUM, AGA FOR R1 TO R3)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO 1) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS NO. 1 TO 3 TO REINVESTIGATE CRIMINAL CASE IN CRIME NO. 200/2023 REGISTERED IN HALAGERI PS, TALUK RANEBENNUR, VIDE ANNEXURE-B, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND ETC. Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13056 WP No. 106439 of 2025
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
1. Learned AGA accepts notice for respondent Nos. 1 to
3. 2. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
1. Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents no. 1 to 3 to reinvestigate Criminal Case in Crime No. 200/2023 registered in Halageri PS, Taluk Ranebennur, vide Annexure-B, in the interest of justice. 2. To issue an appropriate direction or relief which deems fit under facts and circumstances of case. 3. Initially a complaint had been filed alleging that the accident had been caused by a driver of a TATA ACE vehicle. Subsequently, after investigation a charge sheet had been laid implicating the petitioner on the basis of the 161 statements recorded by the Investigating Officer. The petitioner is before this
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13056 WP No. 106439 of 2025
Court contending that the investigation has not been carried out properly and therefore is required to be re-investigated. 4. Such a prayer sought for by an accused cannot be granted merely for the asking.
A charge sheet having been laid after investigation, it would be for the petitioner during the course of trial to dispute the investigation and establish that the investigation has not been carried out properly or if deemed fit, to lead evidence to prove the investigation to be improper. It would then be for the Court to consider the same and pass necessary orders. 5. An accused, as a matter of right, cannot seek for determining which authority would investigate and whether the investigation is proper or not or to seek for re-investigation before trial. - 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13056 WP No. 106439 of 2025
6. That discretion solely vesting with the Trial Court, the petitioner making out no grounds, petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE
Sh Ct:pa List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21