This court, on a writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, disposed of the petition as having not been pressed by the counsel.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
WRIT PETITION NO.11288 OF 2019(GM-POLICE)
BETWEEN:
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. KIRAN B S, ADVOCATE)
AND:
2
… RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. VINOD KUMAR, AGA FOR R1 & R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF PROHIBITION OR QUO WARRANTO OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION TO R-1 & 2 IN ORDER TO RESTRAIN THEM AND THEIR OFFICIALS FROM EXERCISING POWER UNLAWFULLY AND WITHOUT JURISIDICTION FOR INFLICTING WRONGFUL LOSSES TO PETITIONERS AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
3
ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petition may be disposed off as having not been pressed.
Placing the submission of the learned counsel on record, this petition is disposed off as having not been pressed.
Sd/JUDGE
Bsv
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Manjunath S
Harish Pandurangachar
The State of Karnataka
Krishna S. Dixit
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
