IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.5359 OF 2019 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN:
M/S.RIBCO STEEL MART NO.294, NH-66, HADEEN, SARPANAKATTE, BHATKAL UTTARA KANNADA-581320, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY, MR.S.M.RUMAIZE. ...PETITIONER (BY P.N.NANJA REDDY, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560002.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE BENGALURU EAST, HALASURU, BENGALURU-560008.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE BANASWADI SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU-560043.
4. THE INSEPCTOR OF POLICE K.G.HALLI POLICE STATION, BENGALURU-560045.
5. THE POLICE INSPECTOR BHATKAL POLICE STATION, BHATKAL, UTTARA KANNADA-581320.
6. AXIS INFRASTRUCTURE & EXPORTS BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNERS:
a) MR.SALEEM HUSSAIN, S/O HUSSAIN, R/AT NO.133, RASHAD NAGAR, GOVINDPUR MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU - 560045.
b) MR.SADIQ PASHA S/O SALEEM PASHA, R/AT NO.314, 3RD CROSS, VINODABANAGAR, K.G.HALLI, BENGALURU-560045. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VIJAYKUMAR.A.PATIL, AGA FOR R1 TO R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 TO 5 TO REGISTER THE CASE AGAINST THE R-6(a) & (b) IN TERMS OF THE COMPLAINT MADE BY THE PETITIONER AS PER ANNEXURE-M AND INVESTIGATE THE CASE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri P.N.Nanja Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri Vijaykumar.A.Patil, Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the Respondents No.1 to 5.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of Respondents No.6 and 7, taking into account the order which this Court proposes to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to Respondents No.6(a) and (b).
3. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner had interalia prayed for a direction to Respondents No.1 to 5 to register the case against Respondents No.6(a) and (b) in terms of the complaint made by the petitioner as per Annexure – ‘M’.
4. When the matter is taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that even though Respondent No.4 has received the complaint filed by the petitioner, the same has not been registered and a copy of the First Information Report is not furnished to the petitioner and no action has been taken against Respondent No.6.
5. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that incase suitable action has not been taken on the complaint filed by the petitioner, the same shall be taken in accordance with law, if not already taken.
6. In view of the aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel for the parties and in the facts of the case, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to Respondent No.4 to take action on the complaint submitted by the petitioner as per Annexure – ‘M’, in the light of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Lalita Kumari Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2014)2 SCC 1.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
dh JUDGE