1/12 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31st DAY OF JULY 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI WRIT PETITION No.24496/2017 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN:
M/S.KADUR TOWN SOCIALS (R), NANDI KREEDA BHAVANA, T.B.ROAD, KADUR-577 548 CHIKKAMAGALUR REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY BASAVARAJ S.
… PETITIONER (BY MISS.CHARITHA.V. ADV., FOR SRI. SURENDRA.Y.S., ADV.) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001.
2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-5677 101.
3. THE INSP0ECTOR OF POLICE (LAW & ORDER) KADUR POLICE STATION, CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-577 101.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. PRATHIMA HONNAPURA, AGA FOR R-1 to R-3) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO PROHIBIT THE RESPONDENTS FROM INTERFERING WITH DAY-TO-DAY ACTIVITIES OF THE PETITIONER AND FROM CAUSING DISTURBANCE OR OBSTRUCTION IN THE SMOOTH RUNNING OF THE PETITIONER ETC.
THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Miss.Charitha.V. Adv., for Sri. Surendra.Y.S Adv. for Petitioner Smt.Prathima Honnapura, AGA for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 This petition has been filed by M/s.Kadur Town Socials (R.), a recreation club with the following prayers:-
“(i) Issue writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate order or direction, prohibiting the respondents from interfering with day-to-day activities of the petitioner and from causing disturbance or obstruction in the smooth running of the petitioner; and (ii) Issue any other appropriate writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the case in the ends of justice and equity.”
2. From the perusal of the averments made in the petition and various such cases coming to this Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India by way of writ petition, this Court express its concern towards this kind of litigation placed on the Board of the Court in its extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the alleged breach of fundamental and other legal rights of the petitioner Club and its members by the Police authorities of the State.
3. The State of Karnataka has enacted a separate Act for governing the functioning of the police within the State of Karnataka known as Karnataka Police Act, 1963.
4. This Court in similar circumstances, in other petitions filed by such Recreation Clubs, has already laid down Guidelines for both such Recreation Clubs as well as the Police Officials of the State.
5. One such order is placed before the Court in the case of The Shimoga City Club R. vs. The State of Karnataka in W.P.No.47218/2011 dated 19.12.2011, in which the Court has laid down the following guidelines to be followed by both the petitioner and other similar situated Recreation Clubs as well as the Police Officials of the State. Para 3 of the aforesaid order in the case of Shanthala Recreation Club vs. The State of Karnataka in W.P. No.54710/2016 dated 24.10.2016 is quoted below for ready reference:-
“3. The issue which has been raised in the instant petition has already been considered by this Court in W.P.No.30071/2014 dated 15.10.2014 (The Media N Members Club vs. State of Karnataka and Others) wherein the petition was disposed of with the following directions:-
i) The petitioner shall install within a period of six weeks, CC TV cameras, at all the places of access to its members and also at all the places, wherein games(s) is / are played by the members. The CC TV footage of atleast prior 15 days’ period shall be made available by the petitioner, to the police, as and when called upon to do so.
ii) The petitioner shall issue identity card(s) to all its member(s), which shall be produced by the member(s), when called upon by the police, during the raid(s) and surveillance etc.
iii) The petitioner shall not allow any non-member(s) or the guest(s) of the member(s), to make use of its premises for the purpose of playing any kind of game(s) or recreational activities.
iv) The petitioner shall not permit any activity by any of its member(s), by indulging in acts of amusement, falling within the definition of Ss.2(14) & 2(15) of the Act and shall not permit any game(s) of chance as per Explanation (II) of Sub-section (7) of Section 2 of Karnataka Police Act, 1963. The member(s) shall not be allowed to play any kind of game(s) with stakes or make any profit or gain out of the game(s) played.
v) The petitioner shall put proper mechanism in place and shall ensure that no game(s) is played in any unlawful manner by the member(s). If the police find that game(s) played is contrary to any law and in violation of the settled practice, it is open to them to take action against petitioner and the offenders, in accordance with law.
vi) The jurisdictional police shall have liberty to visit premises periodically and/or on receipt of any information about any unlawful activity being carried on in the petitioner’s premises.
vii) The respondents are directed not to interfere with the lawful recreational activities carried on by the members of the petitioner – Club/Association.
viii) It is made clear that this order would not come in the way of the jurisdictional police invoking the provisions of the Act and taking action in accordance with law, if the member(s) of the petitioner are found to have indulged in any unlawful or immoral activities.”
This writ petition is also disposed of in the aforesaid terms.”
6. This Court in another recent decision in the case of Banker’s Recreation Association & another vs. State of Karnataka and others in W.P.No.31193/2017, passed an order on 25.07.2017 that, in any case if such petitioner has any grievance against alleged illegal activities of any police officials of the State Government, they can certainly approach the State Police Complaint Authority headed by a Former Judge of High Court and assisted by other Senior officials of the State Government including one of them in the rank of Principle Secretary of the State Government to attend to such grievance of such citizens or petitioner or clubs or societies etc.
7. In that order, the Court relegated back the petitioner’s Club to such Police Complaints Authority with the following observations:-
“The learned AGA has brought to the notice of the Court Section 20-C of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963 which is quoted below for ready reference:-
“20-C. State Police Complaints Authority – (1) The State Government Shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute the State Police Complaints Authority consisting of five persons, namely:-
(i) one shall be the Chairman selected from among the panel of three retired High Court Judges recommended by the Chief Justice of High Court of Karnataka.
(ii) one member shall be from among the retired Civil Service who shall be an officer not below the rank of Principal Secretary to Government.
(iii) one member shall be from Civil Society. The Civil Society member shall be chosen by the State Government from amongst the panel of three names recommended by the Search Committee consisting of three persons nominated by the State Government one each representing the Human Rights Commission, the Karnataka Public Service Commission and the Lokayukta. The State Government shall appoint one of the members as the Chairman of the Search Committee and an officer not below the rank of Deputy Secretary to Government, Home Department as the converner of the Search Committee. The person in the panel shall be a person of repute who has rendered humanitarian service in the field of education, health, upliftment of the poor etc. and had not aligned himself with any political party or ideological group.
(iv) one women IPS Officer of not below the rank of Deputy Inspector General of Police; and (v) the Additional General of Police (Grievance) nominated by the State Government as the Ex officio member and Member Secretary of the Authority”.
3. From a bare reading of the said provision, it is clear that any person, a victim or any other person, if he has any grievance against the actions of the police officials of the State, they can approach the said Complaint Authority, which is headed by a former Judge of the High Court and other high power persons.
4. This Court does not appreciate the reason for the petitioners to approach this Court by way of present writ petition directly under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
5. The present petition contains absolutely vague averments made in the writ petition that the police officials are disturbing the peace and living of the petitioners without any valid reason. No specific instance has been pointed out in the present petition as well.
6. The petitioners can always avail their normal and ordinary remedy in the competent subordinate Courts below as well. In view of the effective forums already provided in the Karnataka Police Act and Code of Criminal Procedure, this Court is fully convinced that there is no justification for entertaining this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.”
8. The present petition also deserves to be disposed of in same terms, in both the aforesaid orders.
9. This Court is also of the opinion that such complaints raised before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India may require investigation into various facts which are required to be established with cogent and relevant evidence. Such investigation of the facts and arriving at the findings of facts to grant relief to the petitioner, cannot be undertaken in writ jurisdiction.
10. Therefore, it is only appropriate and suitable for such petitioner, to follow the Guidelines quoted above as laid down by this Court and to approach the competent highest body for their redressal of grievance before the State Police Complaints Authority constituted under Section 20-C of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963.
11. Therefore, the present petition is also disposed of in same terms. No order as to costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE MH/-