- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22255 WP No. 12806 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.12806 OF 2026 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: K.M.PRASHANTH S/O K.M.SOMASHEKHARAIAH AGED 44 YEARS R/O NO.743/1, "BHAGYASHRI NILAYA" 2ND MAIN, 1ST CROSS, 1ST STAGE SHIVAKUMARASWAMY BADAVANE DAVANAGERE DISTRICT -577001 …PETITIONER (BY SRI.G.J.SUNKAPUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS HOME SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME M.S.BUILDING DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU -560001 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DAVANAGERE DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577001 3. THE POLICE INSPECTOR EXTENSION POLICE STATION DAVANAGERE DAVANAGERE CITY-577001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.K.P.YOGANNA, AGA) Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22255 WP No. 12806 of 2026 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO TAKE SUITABLE LEGAL ACTION BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 04.03.2026 AT ANNX-A BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION. 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 petitioner is seeking mandamus against respondents to take suitable legal action by considering petitioner's representation dated 04.03.2026 as per Annexure-A. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA appearing for the respondents. 3. Learned Additional Government Advocate, on instructions, would submit that the factual matrix placed before this Court discloses a purely commercial transaction between the petitioner’s father and several agriculturists. It is contended that the petitioner’s father had purchased - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22255 WP No. 12806 of 2026 food grains from various farmers and, despite repeated demands, has failed to discharge the monetary liability arising therefrom. Consequently, the said farmers are asserting their lawful claim for recovery of the amounts due to them. 4. In that backdrop, learned AGA would contend that the impugned complaint is nothing but a counterblast, instituted with an oblique motive, and significantly, the same is not even addressed to the jurisdictional Station House Officer but is submitted before respondent No.2 – the Superintendent of Police, who is a superior officer, thereby indicating absence of a bona fide attempt to set the criminal law in motion in accordance with procedure. 5. This Court, having carefully perused the contents of the written complaint produced at Annexure–A, is of the considered view that the allegations, even if taken at face value, predominantly emanate from a commercial and monetary dispute between private parties. The tenor and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22255 WP No. 12806 of 2026 substance of the complaint do not, at this stage, prima facie disclose ingredients of any cognizable offence warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is also relevant to note that the complaint is not lodged before the jurisdictional Police Inspector/Station House Officer but is directly addressed to the Superintendent of Police, which further fortifies the view that the petitioner seeks to invoke writ jurisdiction prematurely. 6. In that view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction at this juncture. However, it is clarified that if, in future, a complaint is presented before respondent No.3 – the jurisdictional Police Inspector, disclosing commission of any cognizable offence, the said authority shall consider the same in accordance with law and take appropriate action, strictly in conformity with the procedure prescribed under law. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22255 WP No. 12806 of 2026 With the above observations and liberty, the writ petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13