Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1526 (KAR)

SRI RAKESH MALLI v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/12069/2023 · 2026-03-12

Lalitha Kanneganti

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14860 WP No. 12069 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 12069 OF 2023 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: 1. SRI RAKESH MALLI S/O SADANAND MALLI AGED 49 YEARS PALLAMAJAL HOUSE MODANKAPU POST BANTWAL TALUK - 574 153 DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT …PETITIONER (BY SMT. MELANIE SEBASTIAN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE - 560 001 2. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE STATE INTELLIGENCE HEAD OFFICE NRUPATUNGA ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT PANDESHWA, MANGALORE D.K. - 575 001 Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14860 WP No. 12069 of 2023 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE MANGALORE CITY MANGALORE D.K. - 575 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MANJUNATH K., HCGP) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT No.3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 01/04/2023 PRODUCED HERETO AS ANNEXURE-A AND REPRESENTATION DATED 01/05/2023 PRODUCED HERETO AS ANNEXURE-A1, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE AND TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SECURITY WITH AT LEAST TWO ARMED POLICE SECURITIES FOR 24 HOURS PERIOD, AT THE COST OF THE PETITIONER, SO AS TO PROTECT HIS LIFE, IN ENFORCEMENT OF THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT UNDER ARTICLE 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14860 WP No. 12069 of 2023 ORAL ORDER The writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents to considering the representation. 2. A memo is filed seeking to withdraw the writ petition with liberty. This Court do no see the reason why the liberty should be granted. If any fresh cause of action is there, the petitioner is always at liberty to question the same. 3. The memo is taken on record. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. 4. All I.As. in this petition shall stand close. Sd/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE SD List No.: 2 Sl No.: 3