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

Thomas Philips vs The State Of Karnataka And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|16 July, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION No.27851/2018 (GM - POLICE) BETWEEN:
THOMAS PHILIPS, AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS, S/O LATE C.THOMAS PHILIPS, R/A NO.05, MC PHERSON ROAD, COOKE TOWN, BANGALORE – 560 005.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI DILRAJ ROHIT SEQUEIRA, ADVOCATE (ABSENT)) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY HOME SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE – 560 001.
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 001.
3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, CID, CARLTON HOUSE, PALACE ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 001.
4. THE STATE, REPRESENTED THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PULAKESHINAGARA POLICE, BANGALORE – 560 005.
REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE – 560 001.
5. SMT. VAIJAYANTHI MALA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, W/O ARUMUGAM, R/A NO.5, 3RD CROSS, L.B.SHASHRINAGAR, INDIRANAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 038.
6. I.JOHN NESAKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, S/O IRUTHAYAM, R/A NO.36, TF-2, NASCO GULMOHAR APARTMENT, HAINES ROAD, FRAZER TOWN, BANGALORE – 560 005.
…RESP0NDENTS (BY SRI B.BALAKRISHNA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4;
SRI Y.P.VIJAYA VASANTHA KUMAR, ADV., FOR R5 AND R6) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 482 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO DIRECT THE STATE CID I.E., RESPONDENT NO.03 TO TAKE UP THE CASE, IN PCR NO.54011/2018, INVESTIGATE THE CASE AND THEREAFTER DEAL WITH THE ACCUSED PERSON IN ACCORDING WITH LAW.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER None appears for the petitioner.
Sri B.Balakrishna, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 4.
Sri Y.P.Vijaya Vasantha Kumar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.5 and 6.
Perused the records.
2. Petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia has prayed the following relief:
“A). Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ or direction, directing the state CID, i.e., respondent No.3 to take up the case, in PCR.No.54011/2018, investigate the case and thereafter deal with the accused persons in accordance with law, in the interest of justice”.
4. When the matter was taken up today, Sri B.Balakrishna, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 4 submits that the complaint filed by the petitioner has been enquired into and FIR No.95/2018 has already been registered on 26.06.2018. It is further submitted that the matter is being enquired into and charge sheet is likely to be filed expeditiously.
5. The aforesaid submission is taken on record.
6. In view of the aforesaid submission, nothing further survives for adjudication in this petition. Accordingly, petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.
Sd/- JUDGE PB
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

Thomas Philips vs The State Of Karnataka And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
16 July, 2019
Judges
  • Alok Aradhe