Karnataka High Court
Dr R Rajaram vs State Of Karnataka on 19 June, 2012
Author: Ajit J Gunjal
Bench: Ajit J. Gunjal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE 2012
BEFORE
THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT J. GUNJAL
WRIT PETITION NO.19066 OF 2012 (GM-POLICE)
BETWEEN :
Dr. R. Rajaram,
S/o. Late Ramachandrappa,
Age: 62 years, Occ: Service,
R/at Marenahalli Village,
Holur Hobli, Kolar Taluk,
Now residing at No.82,
II Division, R.K. Extension,
Srinivaspur Town,
Srinivaspur Taluk,
Kolar District ... Petitioner
( By Shri. Prasanna Y.R., Adv.)
AND
1. State of Karnataka,
Rep. by its Chief Secretary,
Department of Home, Law and order,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore - 560 001
2. The Superintendent of Police,
Kolar District, Kolar
3. The Circle Inspector of Police,
Kolar Rural, Kolar Taluk,
Kolar District
2
4. The Inspector of Police,
Kolar Rural, Kolar Taluk,
Kolar District
5. The Sub-Inspector of Police,
Kolar Rural, Kolar Taluk,
Kolar District
6. The Deputy Commissioner,
Kolar District, Kolar
7. The Tahsildar,
Kolar Taluk, Kolar
8. The Taluk Panchayath,
Rep. by its Chief Executive Officer,
Kolar
9. The Grama Panchayath, Holur,
Rep. by its Panchayath Devt. Officer,
Holur, Kolar Taluk,
Kolar District ... Respondents
(By Smt. M.C. Nagashree, HCGP )
This Writ Petition is filed under Article - 226 of the
Constitution Of India praying to direct the first respondent to
consider the complaints and representations dated
22.09.2010, 05.03.2012, 11.03.2012, 03.04.2012 and
07.05.2012 vide Annexure - B, J, K, P and S respectively and
provide and extend protection to his life and property.
This petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing this
day, the court made the following:-
3
ORDER
The case of the petitioner is that he was brutally attacked by some of the accused in respect of a property dispute. The accused were charge-sheeted for various offences and the matter was committed to session in S.C. No.28/2010. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the trial of all the accused, have been acquitted. As against which, complainant has filed a criminal appeal and the said appeal is pending adjudication.
2. In the meantime, few residents of the village are trying to harass the petitioner as well as threatening with the life. Hence, the petitioner makes a request to the respondent seeking protection to his life and property.
3. It is not in dispute that in respect of the very same property a second appeal is pending before this court in R.S.A. No.530/2011. An endorsement is issued at Annexure - G, indicating that the petitioner is required to have the dispute resolved in the Civil Court and that the police protection could be provided to him.
4
4. The jurisdictional police are also of the view that there is a serious dispute as to the property and a case in Crime No.97/2012, under Section - 107 of Cr.P.C. was registered and have requested of the parties concerned to maintain peace and tranquility in the area.
5. I am of the view that the question of granting the request made by the petitioner does not arise. Inasmuch as, in view of Annexure - G, the police have stated that they are providing protection.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the Regular Second Appeal pending in R.S.A. No.530/2011 before this Court, an interim order of status-quo has been granted. If it is so, it is open for him to make an application in the said appeal seeking implementation of the said order. Reserving the liberty to do so, the petition stands disposed of.
SD/-
JUDGE JJ*