Karnataka High Court
M/S. Tilt Room - 2 vs The State Of Karnataka on 19 March, 2024
Bench: Chief Justice, Krishna S Dixit
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:11295-DB
CCC No. 72 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.72 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
M/S TILT ROOM-2,
A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE
PROVISIONS OF SOCIETIES
REGISTRATION ACT, 1960
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
NO.19, 1ST CROSS, 4TH MAIN ROAD,
CHAMRAJPET, BENGALURU - 560 018.
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
SRI.RAKESH
...COMPLAINANT
(BY SRI. MANJUNATH H., ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed
by SHARADA
VANI B AND:
Location: HIGH 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...PROFORMA RESPONDENT
2. SRI.DAYANANADA
THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
NO.1, INFANTRY ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:11295-DB
CCC No. 72 of 2024
3. SRI.ABDUL AHAD,
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE-1,
OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
NO.1, INFANTRY ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
4. SRI.RAHUL KUMAR SHAHPURWAD,
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE-1,
OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
SOUTH END CIRCLE, BASAVANAGUDI,
BENGALURU - 560 004.
5. SRI.T.M.DHARMENDRA,
THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
V V PURAM POLICE STATION,
TIPPU SULTAN PALACE ROAD,
KALASIPALYAM, BENGALURU - 560 002.
...ACCUSED
(BY SRI. S S MAHENDRA., G.A)
THIS CCC FILED UNDER ARITICLE 215 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE
CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 PRAYING TO INITIATE
CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR
DISOBEYING THE FINAL ORDER DATED 27.11.2023 PASSED IN WP
No.26378/2023 ON THE FILE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT AND
PUNISH THEM FOR VIOLATING THE SAID ORDER.
THIS CCC COMING ON FOR PRELIMIARY HEARING THIS
DAY, KRISHNA S DIXIT.J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This compliant alleges violation of a learned Single Judge's order dated 27.11.2023 rendered in W.P.No.26378/2023 (GM- POL). The operative portion of order reads as under: -3-
NC: 2024:KHC:11295-DB CCC No. 72 of 2024 "6. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER a. The writ petition is allowed.
b. Mandamus issues to the respondents to consider the representation dated 06.11.2023 and pass an order in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
c. The respondents are at liberty to take legal action, in the event, the activities of the recreational society are found unlawful and while doing so, they shall bear in mind the order passed in W.P.No.20532/2023 dated 20.09.2023 and the observations made in the course of this Court."
2. Learned counsel for the complainant vehemently argues that the order in question was made by the learned Single Judge paternalistically in terms of the one made in W.P.No.20532/2023 disposed off by another learned Single Judge of this court and therefore consideration of his client's representation ought to have happened at the hands of the respondent-accused in accordance with law and also the observations made in the said order. He also highlights the interference of police though no illegal activity is being carried on in the subject premises. According to the counsel, all this amounts to a willful violation of the dicta of the court and therefore accused be summoned & tried for the offences punishable u/s.11 & 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. -4-
NC: 2024:KHC:11295-DB CCC No. 72 of 2024
3. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent-accused resists the complaint by filing the Compliance Affidavit on 01.03.2024. He contends that an endorsement dated 28.02.2024 has already been issued to the complainant as per Annexure-R7 as to the result of consideration of the subject application and thus there is compliance of the order which is allegedly violated.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the complaint papers, we decline indulgence in the matter inasmuch as we are satisfied that the endorsement dated 28.02.2024 reflects consideration of complainant's application and the same reads as under:
"»A§gÀºÀ ****** F ªÀÄÆ®PÀ ¤ªÀÄUÉ w½AiÀÄ¥Àr¸ÀĪÀÅzÉãÉAzÀgÉ. ¤ÃªÀÅ ªÀiÁ£Àå PÀ£ÁðlPÀ GZÀÑ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ jmï ¦nµÀ£ï £ÀA§gï 20532/2023 gÀ DzÉñÀzÀ°è £ÀUÀgÀ ZÁªÀÄgÁd¥ÉÃmÉ, 4£Éà ªÀÄÄRå gÀ¸ÉÛ, 1£Éà CqÀØ gÀ¸ÉÛ, £ÀA.19 gÀ°è ¤ÃªÀÅ £ÀqɸÀÄwÛgÀĪÀ ªÉÄ|| n¯ïÖ gÀƪÀiï-2 PÀ解À°è PÁ£ÀÆ£ÁvÀäPÀªÁV C£ÀĪÀÄw ¥ÀqÉ¢gÀĪÀ ªÀÄ£ÀgÀAd£Á ZÀlĪÀnPÉUÀ½UÉ ¸ÀܽÃAiÀÄ ¥ÉưøÀgÀÄ ºÀ¸ÀÛPÉëÃ¥À ªÀiÁqÀzÀAvÉ DzÉñÀ«zÀÄÝ, DzÀgÉ ¸ÀܽAiÀÄ ¥Éưøï oÁuÉAiÀĪÀgÀÄ ¥ÀzÉà ¥ÀzÉà vÀªÀÄä PÀè§ß ZÀlĪÀnPÉUÀ½UÉ CrØ¥Àr¹ ºÀ¸ÀÛPÉëÃ¥À ªÀiÁqÀÄwÛzÁÝgÉAzÀÄ ªÀiÁ£Àå GZÀÑ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ DzÉñÀzÀAvÉ £ÀqÉzÀÄPÉƼÀÄîªÀAvÉ PÉÆÃj ¢£ÁAPÀ: 06/11/2023gÀ ªÀÄ£À« ¥ÀvÀæªÀ£ÀÄß ¸À°è¹zÀÄÝ, ¢£ÁAPÀ:09/11/2023 gÀAzÀÄ F PÀbÉÃjAiÀÄ°è vÀªÀÄä ªÀÄ£À«AiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¹éÃPÀj¸À¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. £ÀAvÀgÀ vÀªÀÄä zÀÆgÀÄ CfðAiÀÄ eÉÆvÉ vÁªÀÅ ®UÀwÛ¹gÀĪÀ ªÀiÁ£Àå GZÀÑ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ jmï ¦nµÀ£ï ¸ÀASÉå 20532/2023gÀ DzÉñÀzÀ ¥ÀæwAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¥Àj²Ã®¸À¯ÁV, ¸ÀzÀj DzÉñÀ ¥ÀvÀæzÀ PÀæªÀÄ ¸ÀASÉå 6(e) gÀ°è CfðzÁgÀgÁzÀ vÁªÀÅ £ÀqɸÀÄwÛgÀĪÀ PÀè¨ï£À°è AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà jÃwAiÀÄ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ ¨Á»gÀ ZÀlĪÀnPÉ £ÀqÉAiÀÄÄwÛgÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ¸ÀܽÃAiÀÄ -5- NC: 2024:KHC:11295-DB CCC No. 72 of 2024 ¥ÉưøÀjUÉ ªÀiÁ»w zÉÆgÉvÀ°è ¥ÉưøÀgÀÄ PÀè¨ïUÉ ¨sÉÃn ¤Ãr ¥Àj²Ã°¹ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ ¨Á»gÀ ZÀlĪÀnPÉUÀ¼ÀÄ £ÀqɸÀÄwÛgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ PÀAqÀÄ §AzÀ°è ¸ÀÆPÀÛ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¸À§ºÀÄzÉAzÀÄ DzÉñÀ«gÀÄvÀÛzÉ. ªÀiÁ£Àå £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ DzÉñÀªÀ£ÀÄß ¥Àj¥Á®£É ªÀiÁqÀĪÀAvÉ ¸ÀܽÃAiÀÄ ¥ÉưøÀjUÉ ¸ÀÆZÀ£É ¤ÃqÀ¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
DzÀgÉ vÁªÀÅ f¯Áè ¸ÉƸÉÊnUÀ¼À £ÉÆÃAzsÀuÁ¢üPÁj/jf¸ÁÖçgï gÉhÆãï
-4, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ ¹n gÀªÀjAzÀ ¥ÀqÉ¢gÀĪÀ ¥ÀgÀªÁ£ÀVAiÀÄ°è «¢ü¹gÀĪÀ µÀgÀvÀÄÛUÀ¼ÀAvÉ ºÁUÀÆ ªÀiÁ£Àå PÀ£ÁðlPÀ GZÀÑ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀĪÀÅ ºÉÆgÀr¹gÀĪÀ ªÉÄîÌAqÀ jmï ¦nµÀ£ï ¸ÀASÉå 20532/2023gÀ DzÉñÀ PÀæªÀÄ ¸ÀASÉå 6 gÀ G¥À PÀæªÀĸÀASÉå" "a" "b" "c" & "d" gÀAvÉ PÀè¨ï£À°è PÀè¨ï£À £ÉÆAzÁ¬ÄvÀ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀÄUÀ½UÉ ªÀiÁvÀæ ªÀÄ£ÀgÀAd£Á ZÀlĪÀnPÉUÀ¼À°è ¥Á¯ÉÆμÀî®Ä CªÀPÁ±À ¤ÃqÀĪÀAvÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ PÀè¨ï£À°è AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà EvÀgÉ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ ¨Á»gÀ ZÀlĪÀnPÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß £ÀqɸÀzÀAvÉ F ªÀÄÆ®PÀ ¤ªÀÄUÉ ¸ÀÆa¹ F »A§gÀºÀzÀ ªÀÄÄSÉãÀ w½AiÀÄ¥Àr¸À¯ÁUÀÄwÛzÉ."
5. The endorsement specifically warns the complainant against any illegal activities being carried on in the subject premises and that the local police have been instructed to take appropriate action should there be commission of offences. It also directs the complainant to adhere to terms & conditions specified in the order on W.P.No.20532/2023, more particularly those enumerated under paragraph 6. This in our considered view accords with the extant law and the views of the court in similar matters. If the complainant is aggrieved by the said endorsement, he has to work out his remedy elsewhere in accordance with law and not in contempt jurisdiction wherein critical examination of the said endorsement cannot be undertaken.
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC:11295-DB CCC No. 72 of 2024 In the above circumstances, this complaint being devoid of merits is liable to be dropped. Liberty is reserved to the complainant as indicated above.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
JUDGE Snb/