Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 86468 (KAR)

M/S ASCEND TELECOM INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/17762/2025 · 2025-07-16

S Sunil Dutt Yadav

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26659 WP No. 17762 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 17762 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: 1. M/S ASCEND TELECOM INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD REGISTERED OFFICE AT UNIT NO. 410, NEW MUNICIPAL NO. 9-1-87 AND 119/1/4F/UNIT NO. 10, 4TH FLOOR, EDEN AMSRI SQUARE, ST JOHNS ROAD, SECUNDERABAD, TELANGANA, INDIA - 500 003 COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANY ACT, 1956 BRANCH OFFICE AT - SANGEETHA TOWER, NO.3, 80 FEET ROAD, INDIRA NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 038. REPRESENTED BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, S. RAVI SHETTY, S/O. SRI. SUBBRAMANYA SHETTI, … PETITIONER (BY SRI. MAHESH B J., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by PRAKASH N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26659 WP No. 17762 of 2025 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001. REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, INFANTRY ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KONANAKUNTE POLICE STATION, BENGALURU - 560 062. … RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, AGA) *** THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO EXTEND ADEQUATE PROTECTION TO THE PETITIONER'S MOBILE TELECOMMUNICATION TOWER BEING INSTALLED IN THE "PETITION SCHEDULE PROPERTY" AND FURTHER TO EXTEND ADEQUATE PROTECTION TO THE WORKERS AND ASSETS CONNECTED WITH THE TELECOMMUNICATION TOWER THEREON AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26659 WP No. 17762 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The present petition has been filed seeking protection to the petitioner's mobile phone tower being installed in the schedule property of the petitioner. 2. The case made out by the petitioner is regarding interference and threat by certain unidentified persons. 3. In the event, if there is any criminal offence committed, it is for the respondent Police to take appropriate action against such offence. 4. With such observation, the petition is disposed off as not calling for adjudication. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE VGR