- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20714 WP No. 815 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 815 OF 2022 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. H.M. NATARAJ S/O MALLIKARJUNA H. AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS NO.22, NHS ROAD V.V. PURAM BENGALURU - 560 004 2. SHABBIRKHAN S/O IQBALKHAN AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT NO.20, AZAD NAGAR, CHAMRAJPET BENGALURU - 560 018 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. M. SUBRAMANYA BHAT, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY HOME DEPT. VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001 2. THE CHAIR PERSON HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20714 WP No. 815 of 2022 M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU - 560 034 4. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE KORAMANGALA BENGALURU -560 034 5. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KORAMANGALA POLICE STATION KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560 034 6. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR BENGALURU ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CO. K.R.CIRCLE BENGALURU-560 001 7. THE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL) BESCOM, VIGILANCE POLICE STATION BENGALURU. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH K., HCGP FOR R1, R3, R4 AND R5 SMT. MAMATHA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 SRI. H.V. DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R6 AND R7) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 TO 4 TO CONSIDER THE COMPLAINT DATED 08.01.2022 TO - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20714 WP No. 815 of 2022 TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW UNDER ANENXURE-L, L1 TO L4 RESPECTIVELY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER The present petition is filed seeking the following prayer: (i) Issue writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents No.1 to 4 to consider the complaints dated 08.01.2022 to take appropriate action in accordance with law under Annexure-L, L1 to L4 respectively. (ii) Issue direction to the respondent No.5 to consider the representations dated 10.12.2021 and 04.12.2021 under Annexure-F and E respectively. (iii) Issue writ in the nature of certiorari and quash the back billing dated 09.11.2021 issued by the respondent No.7 under Annexure- G. (iv) Issue direction to the respondents No.5 to 7 to pay compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- for having illegally taken - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20714 WP No. 815 of 2022 custody of the 2nd petitioner for de-faming the image of the 1st petitioner and 2nd petitioner. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he has entered into a Joint Development Agreement with one Asadullah Khan and others on 27.08.2016 in respect to property bearing No.584, 5th Cross, 6th 'B' Main, 3rd Block, Koramangala, Bengaluru. 3. The said Asadullah Khan also executed a General Power of Attorney in favour of the petitioner on 27.08.2016, pursuant to which the petitioner applied for sanction plan to the BBMP and the same is sanctioned and the petitioners have put up the construction. In the meanwhile, the said Asadullah Khan has raised dispute before the Arbitrator in A.C.No.82 of 2021 and C.M.P.No.20 of 2019. Because of the dispute in COVID-19, work has been stopped and the petitioner was not using any electricity and in this regard petitioner paid minimum electricity bill every month by renewing the same. He has paid the same upto September 2021. In this regard, the petitioner submitted a representation requesting the respondents to sanction fresh connection to the building. When the respondents failed to take - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20714 WP No. 815 of 2022 any steps, petitioner has issued a legal notice on 05.01.2022 with regard to the inflated back billing and calling upon them to take suitable steps and to consider his application dated 04.12.2021. 4. After issuance of legal notice, two police persons came to the house of petitioner No.2 on 07.01.2021 and took him along with them to the Gauripalya police station. But they have not taken him inside the police station. From there they have taken him to Koramangala police station and then insisted him to get the electrical contractor and also the petitioner No.1 and beaten him very badly and caused injuries over the body. Thereafter, they forced petitioner No.2 to direct the contractor and the petitioner No.1 to withdraw the complaint lodged with the Managing Director, Bescom and also to the vigilance with regard to the legal notice issued to them and they later bring him back to the house and from there, the petitioner was taken to the hospital. After that, the petitioner had lodged a complaint with respondent Nos.1 to 5 with regard to the torture given to the electrical Contractor. Aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondent Nos.6 and 7, the petitioner is before this court. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20714 WP No. 815 of 2022 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that as far as prayer Nos. (1) and (2) are concerned, by efflux of time, such prayers do not survive for consideration at this point of time. As far as prayer No.(3) is concerned, there is an alternative remedy and there may be a liberty granted to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent Nos.6 and 7 submits that this is not an appealable order. Once the bill is raised, if the petitioner has any objections, he has to raise objections before the Authorized Officer, but there is no provision of appeal. It is submitted that the petitioner without doing all these exercises has come before this court in 2022 and obtained an interim order. 7. Learned HCGP submits that as the petitioner is not pressing prayer Nos.(1) and (2), against the respondent Nos.1 to 5, the writ petition may be dismissed as far as the reliefs against the police are concerned. 8. Having heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the material on record. According to the petitioner, the respondents have issued bill, the amount that is raised as per - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20714 WP No. 815 of 2022 the bills is not correct. The remedy that is available to the petitioner is to raise his objection before the Authorized Officer, but not filing an appeal and as far as the relief against the police are concerned, as the petitioner is not pressing for the same, the prayer Nos.(1) and (2) are dismissed as not pressed. As far as the prayer No.(3) is concerned, the petitioner shall file his objections within one month from today before the Authorized Officer and the Authorized Officer shall pass appropriate orders, in the light of the same no orders are required to be passed on prayer No.(4). Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. All I.As. in the writ petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE SS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16