- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1004 WP No. 39080 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 39080 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: MUHAMMED YOUNUS S/O HANEEF G AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS BAGGAMOOLE HOUSE, KULA POST VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK D.K. DISTRICT 574243 GPA HOLDER OF MR.IRSHAD S/O MOHAMMED RAFIQ AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS D.NO./POLYA ROAD SIDE, BADA, UCHILA, UDUPI DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. TALHA ISMAIL BENGRE.,ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1004 WP No. 39080 of 2025 AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SULLIA POLICE STATION, SULLIA D.K REPRESENTED, BY HCGP HIGH COURT, BANGALORE-560001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.B. RAVINDRANATH., ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S 133 IMV ACT BY SHO SULLIA POLICE STATION, IN SULLIA D.K. VIDE ANNEXURE-A DATED 15.12.2025 THIS COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO PASS AN ADDITIONAL ORDER. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1004 WP No. 39080 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioner, who asserts is a practicing Member of the Bar in Udupi, is aggrieved by the Notice dated 15.12.2025 [Annexure-A] issued by the respondent. This notice is under Section 133 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and the respondent has called upon the petitioner to appear for ascertaining certain facts within two days from the date of receipt of the notice. The respondent, in calling upon the petitioner to so appear, has recorded that the First Information in Crime No.142/2025 is registered for offence punishable under Section 281 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and that the first information is that a car alleged to be involved in the accident could be the petitioner's car and certain facts will have to be verified on the movement of the vehicle on 03.12.2025. Sri Talha Ismail Bengre, the learned counsel for the petitioner, proposing to take this Court through - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1004 WP No. 39080 of 2025 the FIR and the terms of the notice, submits that this Court must intervene because the notice refers to the date of accident as 03.12.2025, but the FIR mentions another date and that the petitioner has already appeared before the respondent, who on that day has recorded the petitioner's presence as also the vehicle at the station. Sri B Ravindranath, the learned Additional Government Advocate, who is called upon to accept notice for the respondent, is heard in the light of this grievance. The question for consideration is should this Court intervene at this stage because of what could be certain discrepancies or errors in the impugned notice. This Court is of the view that the respondent who has caused the notice as part of the investigation in Crime No.142/2025, must consider all circumstances as is required under law and that if there is any occasion to seize the petitioner's vehicle, the petitioner must be at liberty to approach the learned - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1004 WP No. 39080 of 2025 Magistrate for release of the vehicle without being prejudiced by the disposal of this petition. This Court opines that any interference otherwise by this Court at this stage would amount to impeding an ongoing investigation and that would not sub-serve the interests of justice. Hence the petition stands disposed of subject to observations as aforesaid. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE AN/-