- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32414 WP No. 20799 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 20799 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: SHRIKANTH SHETTY AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, S/O RAJEEVA SHETTY, R/AT KALLIN JADDU, ULLURU 74 VILLAGE, KUNDAPURA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-576229. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. K. PRASANNA SHETTY.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, 2ND FLOOR, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER KUNDAPURA SUB DIVISION KUNDAPURA Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32414 WP No. 20799 of 2025 UDUPI DISTRICT UDUPI - 572 101. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE UDUPI DISTRICT UDUPI - 572 101. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE SHANKARNARAYANA POLICE STATION, SHANKARANARAYANA KUNDAPURA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT - 572 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.K.P. YASHODHA., AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-CALL FOR RECORDS; QUASH THE ORDER DATED 24.06.2025 PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE KUNDAPURA SUB DIVISION UDUPI DISTRICT IN CASE NO. MAG/16/2025 (ANNEXURE -A). THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32414 WP No. 20799 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioner is aggrieved by the externment order dated 24.06.2025 under Section 55 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963 [for short, 'the Act']. The second respondent, considering the report and the first respondent's response, has reasoned, amongst others, that the petitioner has had to stand trial in ten criminal proceedings; that he is acquitted with a settlement in one, he is convicted in one and investigation is on in another and that three proceedings are pending trial before the Court. 2. The second respondent has also observed that the petitioner's acquittal is because either the prosecution could not place on record evidence to establish his culpability, or the witnesses have turned hostile because of the petitioner's conduct. The second respondent has also recorded that the residents of the locality have refused to give any - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32414 WP No. 20799 of 2025 statement because of the fear instilled by the petitioner. 3. Sri Prasanna Shetty, the learned counsel for petitioner, submits that this Court must intervene because the second respondent has failed to consider the petitioner's response that the proceedings are because of a personal dispute over certain immovable property while also contending that there is a procedural irregularity in conducting the proceedings. Mrs. K.P. Yashodha, the learned Additional Government Advocate, as against the assertion, submits that the petitioner has not placed on record any material to justify a view that the second respondent has failed to consider that the proceedings are because of a private dispute. The learned Additional Government Advocate refutes the assertion that the second respondent has not followed due procedure. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32414 WP No. 20799 of 2025 4. This Court finds considerable force in the submission inasmuch as no procedural irregularity is seriously pointed out and there is nothing on record in the present proceedings or in the proceedings with the second respondent to show that the petitioner had placed on record material to justify that there was any vindictive action. The petitioner's externment would only be for about another month. In the light of the afore, the petition stands rejected. SD/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA ct:sr