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

Sri Rajendra @ Appu vs State Of Karnataka And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|01 April, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO. 12716 OF 2019 (GM-POLICE) Between:
Sri Rajendra @ Appu, S/o. Late. Narasimha, Aged 38 years, R/at No. 2372, Near R.K Floor Mill, Sanjeevani Nagar, Sahakar Nagar Post, Bengaluru – 560 094.
(By Sri.Vinod Kumar.M, Adv.) And:
… Petitioner 1. State Of Karnataka Represented by The Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department, Vidhanasoudha, Bengaluru – 560 001.
2. The Commissioner Of Police Bangalore City, Infantry Road, Bengaluru – 560 001 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Police Bangalore, North Division, Bengaluru – 560 001.
4. The Inspector of Police, Kodigehalli Police Station, Bengaluru City – 560 092.
(By Sri.Vijay Kumar A.Patil, Adv.) … Respondents This Writ Petition is filed Under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, Praying to quash the rowdy sheet opened and maintained against the petitioner at the R-4 Police station and etc.
This petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Mr.Vinod Kumar.M, 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 learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner is seeking for a writ of certiorari to consider the representation dated 18.01.2019.
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 competent authority. 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 competent authority within two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today, the competent authority 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 ln/-
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

Sri Rajendra @ Appu vs State Of Karnataka And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
01 April, 2019
Judges
  • Alok Aradhe