IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.14446 OF 2018 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN:
M B AIYAPPA SON OF LATE BOPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, RESIDENT OF NALKERI VILLAGE, KAKOTU PARAMBU POST, VIRAJPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT-571218.
(By Mr. HARISH GANAPATHY, ADV.) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560001.
2. THE SUPERINTEDENT OF POLICE, KODAGU DISTRICT, MADIKERI, KODAGU-571201.
3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE VIRAJPET RURAL POLICE STATION, VIRAJPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRCIT-571218.
(By Mr. VIJAY KUMAR A PATIL, AGA ) - - -
… PETITIONER … RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRET THE 2ND RRESPONDENT TO DELETE THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER FROM THE ROWDY SHEETER LIST OPENED IN THE 3RD RESPONDENT RURAL POLICE STATION, AT VIRAJPET ON 20.02.2004 AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Mr.N.Sriram Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr.Vijay Kumar A.Patil, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 4.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
With consent of the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
(a) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to delete the name of the petitioner from the rowdy sheeter list opened in the 3rd respondent Rural Police Station, at Virajpet on 20.02.2004.
(ii) Issue any other appropriate writ or order or direction as this Hon’ble court deems fit an necessary in the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.
4. 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 fresh representation before the Superintendent of Police. 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 liberty that if the petitioner makes a fresh representation to the Superintendent of Police within two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today, Superintendent of Police is directed to decide the representation afresh submitted by the petitioner within a period of four months from the date of receipt of such a representation by a speaking order and in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SS