- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47163 WP No. 34098 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 34098 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: 1. MR BALAKRISHNA S/O LATE NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/A NO. 95, 3RD MAIN, NS PALYA, BTM 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU 560076 2. MRS SWETHA BALAKRISHNA W/O BALAKRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/A NO. 95, 3RD MAIN, NS PALYA, BTM 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU 560076 3. MR NAGARAJ BHEEMANNA S/O BHEEMANNA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/A NS PALYA, BTM 2ND STAGE BENGALURU 560076 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. DILIP KUMAR I S, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE BENGALURU CITY, NO.2, INFANTRY ROAD, BENGALURU 560001 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE SOUTH EAST DIVISION, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU 560034 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE SOUTH EAST DIVISION, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU 560034 Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47163 WP No. 34098 of 2025 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE MICO LAYOUT POLICE STATION BENGALURU 560068 5. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIKASA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.K.P.YASHODHA, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 18/10/2025, BEARING NO. MG/CRM/568/DCP(AV)/2025 PASSED BY THE R3 UNDER SECTION 126 BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 AT ANNX-A TO C. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs; A. Issue a Writ of Certiorari by quashing the impugned order dated 18/10/2025, bearing no. MG/CRM/568/DCP(AV)/2025 passed by the R3 under section 126 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 at Annx-A to C. B. Issue any other writ or direction this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant under the circumstances of the case. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47163 WP No. 34098 of 2025 2. By way of the order dated 18.10.2025, respondent No.3 had directed the petitioner to furnish security for keeping peace in terms of Section 126 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’]. 3. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that, along with the summons issued under Section 126, there is also an order under Section 130 of the BNSS which is required to be passed and enclosed. Secondly, there is no application of mind of respondent No.3 inasmuch as there are civil proceedings which are pending, the order would amount to an injunction restraining the petitioner from visiting his own property. As such, he submits that there is no application of mind. The report submitted by the police has been mechanically accepted by respondent No.3. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused papers. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47163 WP No. 34098 of 2025 5. Section 126 of BNSS is reproduced hereunder for easy reference: 126. Security for Keeping Peace in Other Cases (1) When an Executive Magistrate receives information that any person is likely to commit a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquillity or to do any wrongful act that may probably occasion a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquillity and is of opinion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding, he may, in the manner hereinafter provided, require such person to show cause why he should not be ordered to execute a bond or bail bond for keeping the peace for such period, not exceeding one year, as the Magistrate thinks fit. (2) Proceedings under this section may be taken before any Executive Magistrate when either the place where the breach of the peace or disturbance is apprehended is within his local jurisdiction or there is within such jurisdiction a person who is likely to commit a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquillity or to do any wrongful act as aforesaid beyond such jurisdiction. 6. In terms of Section 126, an Executive Magistrate who receive a report that any person is likely to commit a breach of peace or disturb the public tranquillity or do any wrongful act that may probably occasion a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquillity, is of opinion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding, he may, in the manner - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47163 WP No. 34098 of 2025 provided thereafter require such person to show cause why he should not be ordered to execute a bond or bail bond for keeping peace for such period, not exceeding one year or the Magistrate thinks fit. 7. Section 130 of BNSS is reproduced hereunder for easy reference: 130. Order to be made. When a Magistrate acting under section 126, section 127, section 128 or section 129, deems it necessary to require any person to show cause under such section, he shall make an order in writing, setting forth the substance of the information received, the amount of the bond to be executed, the term for which it is to be in force and the number of sureties, after considering the sufficiency and fitness of sureties. 8. In terms of Section 130 when a Magistrate is exercising power under Section 126, 127, 128 or 129, if he deems to be necessary to require any person to show cause under such section, he shall make an order in writing setting forth the substance of the information received, the amount of the bond to be executed, the term for which it is to be in force and the number of sureties. Section 126 and Section - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47163 WP No. 34098 of 2025 130 of BNSS are, therefore, to be read together inasmuch as the Magistrate exercising powers under Section 126, while calling upon a person to execute a bond or bail bond, is required to pass an order under Section 130, which could be either part of the order under Section 126 or separately enclosed. 9. In the present case, merely because both of them are under a common order would not deter the fact that, along with summons under Section 126, an order under Section 130 is also passed and forms part of the summons issued. 10. Insofar as the second contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no application of mind and mechanically the report of the police has been accepted, a perusal of the order would indicate that there are several complaints which had been registered which resulted in NCR and the reports indicated that there have been some issues between Group-A and Group-B, the petitioner belonging to - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47163 WP No. 34098 of 2025 one of the groups. The details of the complaint in NCR No. 340 of 2015, NCR 270 of 2015, NCR 145 of 2025, 146 of 2025, 158 of 2025, 159 of 2025, 161 of 2025, 294 of 2025 have been dealt with by respondent No.3 in the order passed. There is an application of the mind made by respondent No.3 insofar as those complaints are concerned. 11. The fact there being so many complaints and NCRs registered has given rise to an apprehension that there may be a breach of public peace and tranquillity. In furtherance of which, the bail bond for security has been sought for. 12. I do not find any infirmity in the said order which has been passed. Hence, the petition stands dismissed. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE LN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33