- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49993-DB WP No. 24028 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA WRIT PETITION NO. 24028 OF 2021 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SRI B H GOWDRU @ B HANUMANTHAPPA S/O SRI C.K. BHEEMANNA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS PROPRIETOR M/S SUKH SAGAR DHABA HOTEL/RESTAURANT OPP JANATHA BAZAR HOLALKERE RAOD, CHITRADURGA- 577501 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MURALI B S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF LAW AND JUSTICE VIDHANA SOUDHA DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BANGALORE 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 2. THE KARNATAKA STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION 4TH FLOOR, V PHASE, M.S. BUILDINGS, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BANGALORE 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR Digitally signed by ANNAPURNA G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49993-DB WP No. 24028 of 2021 3. SRI D. YASHODHARA S/O DODDATHIMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/AT JANANI NILAYA BEHIND APMC, VEDHAVATHINAGAR HIRYUR TOWN 572143 CHITRADURGA DISTRICT 4. SRI B. KANTHARAJ S/O BADAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS WORKING PRESIDENT OF DISTRICT JDS UNIT AND EX PRESIDENT OF CMC, CHITRADURGA R/@ CHAITHANYA APARTMENT BHEEMASAMUDRA ROAD, CHITRADURGA 577501 5. MR. H.K. KHADAR KHAN S/O LATE KALANDHAR KHAN AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS SECRETARY OF DISTRICT JDS UNIT AND EX-VICE PRESIDENT OF CMC, CHITRADURGA RESIDING NEAR OLD VEGETABLE MARKET DHARMASHALA ROAD, CHITRADURGA 577501 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.S.ARUNA, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. GOPAL KRISHNA SOODI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI. BASANAGOUDA S.S, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. P H VIRUPAKSHAIAH FOR R3 AND R4; R5 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS WP FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED BEARING HRC NO. 2427/10/7/2019 DATED 14.11.2019 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-X., AND ETC. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49993-DB WP No. 24028 of 2021 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) 1. The present writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India impugning the order dated 14.11.2019 passed by the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission in H.R.C No.2427/10/7/19. 2. The petitioner had given a complaint to the District Judge, Chitradurga in Misc.No.170/2016. It was alleged by the petitioner that his road side hotel / Daba in the name and style of 'Sukha Sagar Daba' situated opposite to Janatha Bazar was demolished by the political workers and a case was registered at Kote Police Station as Crime No.77/2015. A counter case was also registered against the petitioner as Crime No.93/2015. Thereafter, the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49993-DB WP No. 24028 of 2021 petitioner was not allowed to re-open the business as no permission was granted. 3. The petitioner had registered another case in Crime No.38/18 and an atrocity case against him was filed in Crime No.39/2018. The petitioner was arrested and he had to spend ten days in jail and he made Misc.No.170/2016 before the Sessions Court alleging that he has incurred loss of Rs.70,00,000/- plus loss of earning and loss of work. The petitioner thereafter had filed an application to re-start his Sukha Sagar Daba and to take legal action against the persons concerned. 4. The learned Principal District and Sessions Judge in his order dated 16.04.2019, observed as under; "Therefore, the (sic) considering all these facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the clear opinion that, the respondent No.1 to 4 have demolished the structure, constructed at petition situated at near schedule premise, Neelakanteshwara temple, opposite to Janatha Bazar, Chitradurga illegally without following proper procedure, by taking law in to their own hands and caused financial loss to the petitioner B.H. Gowdru. But, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49993-DB WP No. 24028 of 2021 as per the provisions of Human Rights Act, this court has no power to take appropriate action against the concerned parties. At most, this court can forward the report to the Hon'ble chairman, Human Rights Commission, Bengaluru for proper action. With the above discussion I answered point No.1 held in the affirmative and point No.2 is held partly in the affirmative and I proceed to pass the following:- ORDER "The Petition filed by the petitioner B.H. Gowdru under section 21(10) of Protection of Human Rights Act, 1964 is hereby partly allowed. The respondent No. 1 to 3 have demolished the hotel structure constructed in petition schedule premise i.e. khata bearing No.3805/7109/6137 measuring 45 feet X 26 situated at Near Neelakanteshwara Temple, 4th Division, Opposite to Janatha Bazar, Chitradurga illegally and caused financial loss to the petitioner B.H. Gowdru. Hence submit the copy of the judgment before the Hon'ble Chairman, Human Rights Commission, Bengaluru for appropriate action against the respondent No.1 to 3. No order as to costs." 5. The alleged demolition by private persons was on 13.05.2015. However, a complaint came to be filed before the State Human Rights Commission on 19.06.2019. The - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49993-DB WP No. 24028 of 2021 Commission in view of the provision of Section 36(2) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 held that neither the National Human Rights Commission nor the State Human Rights Commission would have jurisdiction to enquire into the complaint in respect of the incident which occurred one year prior to date of the complaint. 6. In this case, the alleged incident happened in the year 2015 and the District Judge passed the order under Section 30 of the Protection of Human Rights Act on 16.04.2019 and the matter was forwarded to the State Human Rights Commission. The State Human Rights Commission has dismissed the complaint on the ground that it was barred by limitation. 7. Even otherwise, the allegation is demolition of the petitioner's Daba by some private persons. The petitioner instead of approaching the Human Rights Commission and resorting to the public law remedy, ought to have - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49993-DB WP No. 24028 of 2021 approached the competent Civil Court claiming damages, etc., 8. We therefore, do not find that such a belated complaint could have been entertained by the State Human Rights Commission beside the fact that the complaint was also barred by limitation. Thus, we dismiss this writ petition. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE GH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28