Ms. Sushma N vs The Commissioner Of Police on 4 September, 2019

[Cites 3, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

Ms. Sushma N vs The Commissioner Of Police on 4 September, 2019

Bench: Alok Aradhe

                         1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2019

                      BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

 WRIT PETITION NO.23473 OF 2018 (GM-POLICE)

BETWEEN:

MS. SUSHMA N
D/O LATE P. NARAYANAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
NO.5/1, 6TH CROSS,
VICTORIA LAYOUT,
BENGALURU-560 047.
                               ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. EUGENE PRABHU, ADVOCATE(ABSENT))

AND:

1.     THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
       INFANTRY ROAD, BENGALURU-01

2.     THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
       BENGALURU CENTRAL DIVISION,
       BENGALURU-560001.

3.     THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
       VIVEKNAGAR POLICE STATION,
       VIVEKNAGAR,
       BENGALURU-560 047.

4.     MR. ARUN NARAYANA
       POLICE SUB INSPECTOR,
       CB-CID THODUPUZHA,
                           2


    IDDUKI DISTRICT,
    KERALA-685 584.
                             ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.M.VINOD KUMAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R3)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER
ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE DIRECTION UNDER
ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA,
THE ENQUIRY INTO THE COMPLAINT OF THE
PETITIONER   DATED  22.05.2018  MADE   TO
RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 3 BE DIRECTED AND
SUITABLE ACTION BE INITIATED AGAINST THE
RESPONDENT NO.4 AND ASSOCIATES.

    THIS WRIT 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 respondent Nos.1 to 3.

Taking into account the order which this Court proposes to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to respondent No.4.

2. Records perused. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia has prayed for the following relief:

'a) Issuance of a writ of mandamus or any proper writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the enquiry into the complaint of the petitioner dated 22.05.2018 made to Respondent No.1 to 3 be directed and suitable action be initiated against the respondent No.4 and associates.'

3. After perusal of the writ petition and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of 'LALITA KUMARI VS. GOVERNMENT OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.', (2014) 2 SCC 1, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction that in case the complaint of the petitioner discloses the commission of a cognizable office, FIR shall be lodged by the jurisdictional police. Ordered accordingly. 4

4. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE dn/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court