Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 88341 (KAR)

SRI NAGESH v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/18917/2025 · 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:26404 WP No. 18917 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. 18917 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: SRI NAGESH S/O VENKATAIAH, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/OF SHANTHINAGAR, PANDAVAPURA TOWN, MANDYA DISTRICT-571435 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PUNEETH. B.S, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA PANDAVAPURA POLICE STATION, PANDAVAPURA, REP BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PANDAVAPURA SUB DIVISION, PANDAVAPURA, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 435. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, AGA) Digitally signed by PRAKASH N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26404 WP No. 18917 of 2025 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SEC.528 OF BNSS, 2023 PRAYING TO A) ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION AND ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER LIKE WRIT OR ORDER THEREBY QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 13.06.2025 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN CASE NO.MAG.CR. 1/2025-26, COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A 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 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 13.06.2025 at Annexure-A passed under Section 55 of the Karnataka Police Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that along with notice, the Police report is required to be furnished in terms of the directions passed by this Court in the case of Sri Prakash vs. The State of Karnataka and Others. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26404 WP No. 18917 of 2025 3. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that there has been a procedural lapse insofar as the report as contemplated under Section 58 was not enclosed along with the notice. 4. On the sole ground, the impugned order is at Annexure-A is set aside. 5. The respondent - Authorities are at liberty to take fresh proceedings under the provisions of the Karnataka Police Act, if circumstances so arise, strictly in conformity for the procedural requirements and the guidelines issued by this Court in the case of Sri Prakash vs. The State of Karnataka and Others. Accordingly, the petition is disposed off. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE DHA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 117 CT: BHK