- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37242 WP No. 25384 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 25384 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: DR DIVYA J AGED 48 YEARS D/O LATE G.L. JAYPAL R/AT HOLENARSIPURA ROAD OPPOSITE FILTER HOUSE, CHANNARAYAPATNA, HASSAN DISTRICT-573116 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ABHILASH VAIDYANATHAN, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. MAHESHWARI D.M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA HOME DEPARTMENT ROOM NO. 110, GATE II, M S BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560001 REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE R C ROAD, OPP. GOVT HOSPITAL, HASSAN 573201 Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37242 WP No. 25384 of 2025 3. THE SUB-INSPECTOR POLICE STATION CHANNARAYPATNA HASSAN-573116 4. SRI. B.N. GOVINDAIHA AGED MAJOR S/O LATE NANJIAH GADDE BINDENAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI CHANNARAYPATNA TALUK HASSAN - 573116 5. SMT. JAYALAKSHMAMMA AGED MAJOR W/O B.N. GOVINDAIHA GADDE BINDENAHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI CHANNARAYPATNA TALUK, HASSAN - 573 116 6. SRI. B.G. HARIPRASAD AGED MAJOR S/O LATE NANJIAH GADDE BINDENAHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI CHANNARAYPATNA TALUK HASSAN - 573 116 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAHUL CARIAPPA, AGA) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2 AND 3 TO REMOVE THE R-4 TO 6 AND THEIR HENCHMEN FROM THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY UNTIL THE COMPLETION OF THE EXECUTION PROCEEDINGS IN EX. NO. 7/2025 PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHANNARAYPATNA, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37242 WP No. 25384 of 2025 HASSAN AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NOS. 2 AND 3 TO PROVIDE POLICE PROTECTION TO THE PETITIONER AND PROTECT THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY FROM ILLEGAL INTERFERENCE BY THE RESPONDENT NOS. 4 TO 6, THEIR HENCHMEN AND THEIR AGENTS AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioner, who is unsuccessful in the civil proceedings with the culmination of the second appeal in RSA No. 1428 of 2024 with this court's judgment dated 26.06.2025, has approached this Court for different directions, which read as under: "[a] Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 to remove the Respondent Nos.4 to 6 and their henchmen from the Schedule Property until the completion of the execution proceedings in Ex.No.7/2025 pending before the Hon'ble Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Channarayapatna, Hassan; - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37242 WP No. 25384 of 2025 b] Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 to provide police protection to the Petitioner and protect the Schedule Property from illegal interference by the Respondent Nos.4 to 6, their henchmen and their agents; c] Issue a writ, or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing the Respondent Nos.2 amd 3 to ensure that the Respondent Nos.4 to 6 and their henchmen do not disturb the Petitioner's peaceful possession over the Schedule Property until the completion of the execution proceedings in Ex.No.7/2025 pending before the Hon'ble Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Channarayapatna, Hassan" 2. This Court on 20.08.2025, after hearing Sri Ashok Haranahalli, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, has issued interim directions as under: i. The private respondents are directed not to be precipitous as regards the use and enjoyment of the property but with liberty - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37242 WP No. 25384 of 2025 to seek just orders in the applications in the pending execution proceedings. ii. The arrangements as mentioned above shall continue subject to the orders of the executing Court, and on the next date of hearing [01.09.2025], the executing Court shall pass just orders on the pending application uninfluenced by this arrangement. iii. The third respondent shall ensure that a copy of this order is filed with the Jurisdictional Tahsildhar for appropriate orders as is contemplated under Chapter IX of the BNSS. iv. Deferring notice to the private respondents, the third respondent is also called upon to ensure intimation of the proceedings and this order is filed with the respondents. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has next placed on record [on 23.08.2025] that there is precipitation despite this Court's order. This Court taking on record the submissions on behalf of the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37242 WP No. 25384 of 2025 Jurisdictional Police that [a] the building comprises four floors and the petitioner has locked herself in the fourth floor fearing trespass [b] the police will ensure that there is no block of access for her or disturbance with her occupation of the fourth floor has observed that appropriate arrangement must be made until 01.09.2025. This Court has issued further directions which read as under: "If the three floors are not in the petitioner’s immediate access for whatever reason, these premises must be under the lock and key of the Jurisdictional Police without allowing anybody to access these three floors, and insofar as the petitioner's access to and from the fourth floor, the Jurisdictional Police must ensure that all restrictions, if any, are removed." 4. Sri Rahul Cariappa, on instructions, states that there is complete compliance with this Court's order as of 01.09.2025 even as of today. Sri Abhilash Vaidyanathan, the learned counsel for the petitioner, proposes to contest these submissions asserting that - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37242 WP No. 25384 of 2025 the private respondents continue to have access to the upper floors; an assertion denied in rejoinder stating that the entire situation is monitored by the Superintendent of Police. 5. Crucially, this Court must observe that this Court's intervention was only to ensure that the Execution Court considers the petitioner's application and though it is now placed on record that the consideration of the applications are deferred because of certain requests for adjournment by private respondents, this Court is of the view that this Court cannot continue to monitor the petitioner’s complaint and redressal thereof. The petitioner must necessarily pursue remedy in the pending execution proceedings if it is permissible and the review petition that is purportedly filed. 6. The petitioner without effectively pursuing those proceedings cannot continue to seek this Court's intervention, especially after closure of the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37242 WP No. 25384 of 2025 civil dispute in terms of the orders in the second appeal. As such, the petition stands disposed of calling upon the respondent - Police to ensure that the petitioner's life is not brought under any threat. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE NV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 21