- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20320 WP No. 9671 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 9671 OF 2026 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: 1. GIRISH KUMAR .Y.N S/O NANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT KEMPANAPURA VILLAGE CHAMARAJANAGARA TALUK CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT-571115. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KRISHNAMOORTHY .D, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF HOME M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001. REP/BY IT'S SECRETARY. 2. THE POLICE COMMISSIONER CHAMARAJA NAGARA CHAMARAJA NAGARA DISTRICT-571115. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR GUNDLUPET TOWN, POLICE STATION CHAMARAJA NAGARA DISTRICT-571111. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER GUNDLUPET TOWN, POLICE STATION Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20320 WP No. 9671 of 2026 CHAMARAJA NAGARA, DISTRICT-571111. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING FOR DIRECTION TO RESPONDENT NO. 2 TO 4 TO CONSIDER AND REGISTER THE FIR ON THE BASIS OF THE COMPLAINT/REPRESENTATION DATED 26-01-2026 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-C TO E IN A STIPULATED TIME IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY 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 petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus to direct respondents 2 to 4 to consider written complaint lodged by petitioner and register the FIR by considering the complaint evidenced at Annexures-“C to E". 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent–State. Perused the material on record. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20320 WP No. 9671 of 2026 3. The primary grievance of the petitioner is that, notwithstanding the lodging of a detailed written complaint dated 26.01.2026 disclosing grave and cognizable offences, the jurisdictional police have failed to discharge their statutory obligation of registering a First Information Report. The petitioner has specifically alleged that the accused persons named in the complaint had trespassed into the petitioner’s premises armed with deadly weapons such as a cycle chain, knife and iron rod, and have not only criminally intimidated the petitioner but have also committed extortion by forcibly taking a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-. These allegations, on the face of it, unmistakably disclose commission of cognizable offences attracting immediate police action. 4. At this juncture, it is trite to observe that when information furnished before the police discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, the registration of FIR is not a matter of discretion but a statutory mandate. The law in this regard is no longer res integra and stands - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20320 WP No. 9671 of 2026 authoritatively settled by the Constitution Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari vs Government Of Uttar Pradesh & Ors1, wherein it is categorically held that registration of FIR under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ,1908 (Corresponding Section 173 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023) is mandatory if the information discloses a cognizable offence, and no preliminary enquiry is permissible except in limited categories. The object of such mandate is to ensure that the rule of law is preserved and that victims of crime are not left remediless due to police inaction or apathy. 5. In the present case on hand, a careful reading of the complaint would prima facie indicate allegations of house trespass, use of criminal force, intimidation with deadly weapons, and extortion, all of which undoubtedly fall within the realm of cognizable offences. Therefore, the inaction on the part of the jurisdictional police in not 1 AIR 2014 SC 187 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20320 WP No. 9671 of 2026 registering the FIR, despite the complaint disclosing such serious allegations, cannot be countenanced and is clearly contrary to the settled principles governing criminal procedure. The police authorities cannot assume unto themselves the role of adjudicating the veracity or otherwise of the allegations at the threshold, so as to defer or deny registration of FIR. 6. Per contra, learned AGA would submit that if appropriate directions are issued, the jurisdictional police would examine the complaint and take action in accordance with law. While such submission is placed on record, this Court deems it necessary to reiterate that the duty cast upon the police is not merely to “look into” the complaint, but to act in strict compliance with the mandate of law governing registration of cognizable offences. 7. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that a mere direction to “consider” or “look into” the complaint would not suffice. Instead, a - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20320 WP No. 9671 of 2026 specific direction is required to ensure adherence to the statutory obligation flowing from Section 154 Cr.P.C.(corresponding Section 173 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023) as interpreted by the Hon’ble Apex Court. 8. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is hereby allowed. (ii) Respondent Nos.2 to 4 are directed to forthwith register a First Information Report if the complaint dated 26.01.2026 discloses commission of cognizable offences, strictly in terms of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh (supra). (iii) Upon registration of the FIR, the respondents shall proceed with the investigation in accordance - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20320 WP No. 9671 of 2026 with law, uninfluenced by any observations made in this order. (iv) The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken expeditiously and, in any event, within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (v) It is made clear that any continued inaction or deviation from the settled legal mandate may entail appropriate consequences, including initiation of action against the erring officials. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE ALB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 81