Disposed

Smt. Deepa v. Vs State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Jan 2022WP/523/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed to transfer criminal investigation from local police station to CID. Petitioner alleged bias and improper investigation. Court directed police commissioner to time-boundly look into the grievance regarding investigation transfer without final merits.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent no.2 to address petitioner's grievance for investigation transfer in a time-bound manner and Respondent no.3 not to precipitate the matter.

Smt. Deepa v Vs State of Karnataka — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

¶6

W.P.NO.523/2022 (GM-POLICE)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. DEEPA.V., W/O VIJAYASEKARAN.R., AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, NO.17, 2ND FLOOR, CHURCH ROAD, UTTARAHALLI, VASANTHAPURA, SUBRAMANYAPURA, BENGALURU - 560 061.

¶9

… PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI JAYSHAM JAYASIMHA RAO, ADV.)

¶11

AND:

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA,

¶13

BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA,

¶14

DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶15

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,

¶16

BENGALURU CITY, NO.1, INFANTRY ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶17

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ASHOKNAGAR POLICE STATION, BENGALURU - 560 025.

¶18

CRIME INVESTIGATION DEPARTMENT,

¶19

¶20

CARLTON HOUSE, BENGALURU - 560 001. REP. BY ADDL. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (CID).

¶21

S.UMASHANKAR, S/O G.SHANMUGAM, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, NO.8, BCMC LAYOUT, 2ND MAIN, 3RD CROSS, RAGUVANAHALLI, KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 062.

¶22

P.ROSHAN, S/O LATE B.R.PANDU, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, NO.28, OLD NO.47, EAST ANJANEYA TEMPLE STREET, BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU - 560 004.

¶23

S.DARSHANA, W/O S.SHANMUGAM, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, NO.17, SAI ANUGRAHA NILAYA, OLD POLICE STATION ROAD, KONANAKUNTE, BENGALURU - 560 062.

¶24

… RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI VINOD KUMAR, AGA FOR R-1 & R-2; NOTICE TO OTHER RESPONDENTS DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 13.01.2022)

¶26

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT R-1 & R- 2 TO TRANSFER THE INVESTIGATION IN CRIME NO.311/2020 PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE 29TH ADDL. CMM, MAYOHALL UNIT, BENGALURU, FROM THE R-3 - ASHOKNAGAR POLICE, BENGALURU, TO THE R-4 - CID OR ANY OTHER SPECIALIZED INVSETIGATING AGENCY.

¶27

¶28

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶29

ORDER

¶30

The short grievance of the petitioner is against the arguable bias Respondent no.3-Police Station. Learned Counsel for the petitioner vehemently argues that the said Police Station is not conducting proper investigation and that it is learnt to be preparing for filing a 'B' report even without looking into the original records to be obtained from the Registry of the Civil Court to establish forgery and fabrication. He also points out about the seizure of said documents by the Registrar General of this Court pursuant to interim order made in a writ petition.

¶31

Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the official respondents, notice to put respondents having been dispensed with, opposes the writ petition contending that no case is made out for seeking the transfer of the investigation; however, having so opposed, now he fairly agrees to instruct his client - respondent no.2 - Police Commissioner to look into the

¶32

¶33

grievance of the petitioner in a time bound way. This is appreciable enough.

¶34

In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing Respondent no.2 - Commissioner of Police to address the grievance of the petitioner for the transfer of the investigation from respondent no.3-Police Station to any other Police Station, in accordance with law. Till the redressal of petitioner's grievance takes place, respondent no.3 shall not precipitate the matter. All contentions are kept open.

¶35

Now, no costs.

¶36

Sd/JUDGE

¶37

Smt. Deepa v. Vs State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Deepa v. Vs State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajeeb Kumar Mohanta Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr. Riayaz Ahmed Vs the Karnataka State Board of Wakf

Sri Nawaz Ahmed Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri N Suresh Vs the South Indian Bank Limited

Shivachandran Vs Bangarashetty

The Mvm Private Industrial Vs the State of Karnataka