- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13873 WP No. 34522 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.34522 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: DEEPAK KUMAR SHETTY S/O BALAKRISHNA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT LALITHA HOUSE AGARMEL ROAD SURATHKAL POST & VILLAGE MANGALORE-575 014 …PETITIONER (BY SRI.KETHAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY IT'S SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT VIKASA SOUDHA DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD BENGALURU -560001 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE NO.2, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE MANGALURU CITY Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13873 WP No. 34522 of 2025 MANGALURU DAKSHINA KANNADA- 575 001 4. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SURATHKAL POLICE STATION MANGALORE DAKSHINA KANNADA-575 014 5. RAGHU NAYAK THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE LAW AND ORDER SURATHKAL POLICE STATION MANGALORE DAKSHINA KANNADA-575 014 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.K.P.YOGANNA, AGA FOR R.1 TO R.4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 29.10.2025 (VIDE ANNEXURE-A) SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER AND INITIATE APPROPRIATE ACTION AGAINST RESPONDENT NO.5 AND OFFICIALS UNDER HIM AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The captioned writ petition is filed seeking for the following reliefs; - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13873 WP No. 34522 of 2025 "a) Issue a writ of mandamus to directing the Respondent No.3 to consider the representation dated 29.10.2025 (vide Annexure-A) submitted by the petitioner and initiate appropriate action against respondent No.5 and officials under him. b) Issue direction to respondent Nos.4 and 5 not to interfere with day to day business of the petitioner which he has been carrying out legally from past many years. c) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant." 2. The petitioner’s case is that he is carrying on business by running a Bar and Restaurant under the name and style “Deepak Bar” situated at Kana, Surathkal, Mangaluru. According to the petitioner, the establishment is being run after obtaining all requisite licences and permissions from the competent authorities. It is further stated that while the Bar and Restaurant is operated on the ground floor of the building, the petitioner is also running a lodging facility under the name and style “Deepak Boarding and Lodging” on the first and second floors of the very same building. The petitioner asserts - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13873 WP No. 34522 of 2025 that the lodging facility is duly licensed and that a valid trade licence has been issued by the Mangalore City Corporation. It is also admitted by the petitioner that certain rooms situated on the top floor of the building are reserved for the accommodation of employees working in the hotel establishment. 3. The petitioner claims to have submitted a representation dated 29.10.2025 addressed to respondent No.3, which is produced at Annexure–A. In the said representation, the petitioner has alleged that respondent No.5, who is a Police Officer, has been acting in a hostile and retaliatory manner towards him. The petitioner asserts that respondent No.5 has been openly threatening him that he would not be permitted to carry on his business activities peacefully in the future. The petitioner further alleges that respondent No.5 has been intimidating him by stating that several criminal cases would be foisted against him. According to the petitioner, these threats are allegedly in retaliation to certain complaints made against - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13873 WP No. 34522 of 2025 the petitioner relating to the employment of minor children in the Bar and Restaurant. 4. When this Court specifically queried the learned Additional Government Advocate regarding the non- consideration of the petitioner’s representation dated 29.10.2025, the learned AGA fairly submitted that the representation has not yet been examined by respondent No.3. He would however submit that if reasonable time is granted, respondent No.3 would examine the representation in accordance with law and take appropriate action on the allegations contained therein. 5. It is a settled principle that when a citizen lodges a complaint against a Police Officer before the higher authorities, such complaints cannot be lightly brushed aside or kept pending without examination. The police machinery wields significant statutory powers affecting the life, liberty and dignity of citizens and therefore the conduct of police officers is required to be subject to institutional scrutiny by superior officers whenever - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13873 WP No. 34522 of 2025 allegations of abuse of authority are made. Complaints alleging misuse of power, intimidation, harassment or threats by police personnel must be screened with seriousness and responsibility by the supervisory authorities. 6. The superior officers are therefore duty bound to undertake a preliminary scrutiny of such representations in order to ascertain whether the allegations disclose any prima facie substance. If upon such scrutiny the allegations are found to be frivolous, vexatious or motivated, the authorities are at liberty to reject the complaint at the threshold by assigning brief reasons. However, if the allegations indicate that a police officer may have misused his official position, acted beyond the bounds of lawful authority, or engaged in conduct that amounts to harassment or intimidation of a citizen, the supervisory authorities are obligated to take cognizance of such complaints and initiate appropriate enquiry or disciplinary action in accordance with law. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13873 WP No. 34522 of 2025 7. The rule of law requires that police officers, who are entrusted with maintaining law and order, must themselves act strictly within the framework of law and cannot resort to coercive or retaliatory conduct against citizens. Allegations that police personnel are threatening to implicate individuals in multiple cases or obstructing lawful business activities cannot be ignored by the superior authorities. Such complaints must therefore be examined with due seriousness so as to ensure that the police force does not become an instrument of oppression or intimidation. It is in this background that this Court is of the considered opinion that the grievance projected by the petitioner warrants consideration by respondent No.3 and therefore a writ of mandamus would lie directing the competent authority to examine the representation. 8. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13873 WP No. 34522 of 2025 ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) Respondent No.3 is hereby directed to take cognizance of the representation dated 29.10.2025 produced at Annexure–A and examine the allegations made therein by conducting a preliminary enquiry and thereafter take appropriate action in accordance with law. (iii) The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 2 Sl No.: 5