IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.52100 OF 2018 (GM-POLICE) Between:
C.D.Madappa @ Harisha, S/o.C.P.Devaiah, Aged about 41 years, Resident of Harihara Village & Post, Srimangala Hobli, Virajpet Taluk, Kodagu District, Pin Code-571 201.
(By Sri.R.K.Mahadeva, Advocate) And:
1. The State of Karnataka, Represented by The Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department, Vidhana Soudha, Bengaluru-560 001.
2. The Superintendent of Police, Kodagu District, Madikeri, Pin Code-571 201.
… Petitioner 3. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Virajpet Sub-Division, Kodagu District, Madikeri, Pin Code-571 201.
4. The Circle Inspector of Police, Gonikoppa Circle, Virajpet Taluk, Kodagu District, Madikeri, Pin Code-571 201.
5. The Station House Officer, Ponnampet Police Station, Ponnampet, Gonikoppa Circle, Virajpet Taluk, Kodagu District, Madikeri, Pin Code-571 201.
(By Sri.B.Balakrishna, AGA) …Respondents This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the rowdy sheet opened and maintained against the petitioner in the R-5 police station i.e., Ponnampet Police Station, Gonikoppa Circle, Virajpet Taluk, Kodagu District and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri.R.K.Mahadeva, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri.B.Balakrishna, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondents.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
2. In this petition, the petitioner seeks quashment of the rowdy sheet opened and maintained against the petitioner in the respondent No.5 police station i.e., Ponnampet Police Station, Gonikoppa Circle, Virajpet Taluk, Kodagu District and etc.
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the writ petition be disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file a representation before the competent authority with regard to his grievance and the competent authority be directed to decide the same in accordance with law.
4. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that if such a representation is made by the petitioner, the same shall be dealt with in accordance with law.
5. In view of the submissions made and in the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that if the petitioner makes a representation to the competent authority within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today, the competent authority shall decide the same in accordance with law by a speaking order, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of such a representation.
6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE dn/-