Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Dr T N Bharath Kumar And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|03 April, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.38725 OF 2017 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN:
SHIVALINGAIAH, S/O LINGAIAH, AGED 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.118, III CROSS, III MAIN, 5TH PHASE, BANASHANKARI, BANGALORE-560 070.
(BY MR B.N.SHIVANNA, ADV.) AND:
1. DR. T.N.BHARATH KUMAR, S/O T.K.NARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAMASANDRA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, KANAKAPURA HOBLI, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-577221.
2. T.K.NARAYAN, FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAMASANDRA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, KANAKAPURA HOBLI, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT – 577221.
3. THE POLICE INSPECTOR, CHANNAMMANAKERE ACHKUT POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560 070.
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, …PETITIONER HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BANGALORE-560 001.
4. INSPECTOR GENERAL AND DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. … RESPONDENTS (BY MR VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL, AGA FOR R-3 AND 4) - - -
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-4 TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST THE R-3 IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri.B.N.Shivanna, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri.Vijay Kumar A.Patil, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent Nos.3 and 4.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks for a direction to the respondents to register the first information report.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that the first information report has already been registered in Crime No.320/2017. The aforesaid statement is taken on record.
5. Therefore, nothing survives for adjudication in this petition.
Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as infructuous.
6. In view of the disposal of the writ petition, the pending interlocutory application does not survive for consideration and is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE RV
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Dr T N Bharath Kumar And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
03 April, 2019
Judges
  • Alok Aradhe