Sri Bannanje Raja @ Rajendra vs State Of Karnataka on 9 September, 2019

[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

Sri Bannanje Raja @ Rajendra vs State Of Karnataka on 9 September, 2019

Bench: Alok Aradhe

                        1



 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019

                     BEFORE
       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

     WRIT PETITION NO.931 OF 2019 (GM POLICE)

BETWEEN:

SRI. BANNANJE RAJA @ RAJENDRA
@ RAJA SHETTY
S/O SUDAR SHETTIGAR
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
MUDANIDAMBUR
UDUPI DISTRICT 576101
PRESENTLY A UNDER TRIAL
PRISONER IN HINDALGA CENTRAL
PRISON SH-20 BELGAUM                 ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI S.SHIVA KUMAR, ADVOCATE )

AND:

1.   STATE OF KARNATAKA
     SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT
     GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
     VIDHANA SOUDHA
     BENGALURU 560001

2.   CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT
     HINDALAGA CENTRAL PRISON
     SH.20, BELGAUM 591108          ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI M. VINOD KUMAR, AGA)
                      ---
                              2



     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO PROVIDE
HIM A TELEVISION SET.

     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-


                         ORDER

None for the petitioner.

Sri M.Vinod Kumar, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents.

2. The petition is admitted for hearing and the same is heard finally.

3. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner inter alia prays for a direction to the respondents to provide him a television set.

4. From the perusal of the averments made in the writ petition, it is evident that that the petitioner is imprisoned in Hindalaga Jail, Belgaum and he has 3 demanded a television set by way of recreational facilities.

5. In the fact situation of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider the request made by the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of the Jail Manual by a speaking order within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order passed today. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE PYR

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court