Disposed

S H Vasantha v. State of Karntaka

Karnataka HC21 Mar 2023WP/1404/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution challenging an order of the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission was disposed of by this Court as the writ petition does not survive for consideration despite reliance on a Supreme Court judgment regarding the nature of such orders.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of without the Court considering the merits of the case, with liberty acceded to the petitioner in accordance with law.

S H Vasantha Vs State of Karntaka — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 1404 of 2021

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF MARCH, 2023

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K SOMASHEKAR AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA WRIT PETITION NO.1404 OF 2021 (GM-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

S H VASANTHA S/O S C HALAGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC: POLICE INSPECTOR, (STATE INTELLIGENCE),BENGALURU. RESIDING AT VASANTHA NILAYA, BALEGADHE, SAKALESHPURA, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201.

¶10

Digitally HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201. signed by D K BHASKAR (BY SRI SHESHA KARTHIK REDDY, ADVOCATE, FOR Location: SRI P. PRASANNA KUMAR - ADVOCATE) HIGH COURT OF AND: KARNATAKA

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

STATE OF KARNTAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶13

DIRECTOR GENERAL AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (HQRS), NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶14

¶15

WP No. 1404 of 2021

¶16

SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE RANGOLI HALLA, HASSAN - 573 201.

¶17

KARNATAKA STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION M S BUILDING, DR. B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU, REPRESENTED BY ITS ACTING CHAIRPERSON.

¶18

SRI JAGADISH @ HALIYOOR JAGGA S/O LATE CHANNEGOWDA, HALEYOOR VILLAGE, PIRIYAPATTANA TALUK, MYSURU - 571 102.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, H.C.G.P. FOR R-1 TO R-3; SRI GOPAL KRISHNA SOODI, ADVOCATE, FOR R-4, & SRI HARISH N. R., ADVOCATE, FOR R-5)

¶21

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16.10.2020 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.4KARNATAKA STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION IN HRC NO. 2691/10/12/2018 CLUBBED WITH 427/10/15/2020 AS PER ANNEXURE - R TO THE PETITION.

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, K. SOMASHEKAR, J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

¶25

WP No. 1404 of 2021

¶26

O R D E R

¶27

Sri Shesha Karthik Reddy, learned counsel represents Sri P. Prasanna Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner who is on record, and seeks some short accommodation to persuade this matter by placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of C. GOPAL v.

¶28

KARNATAKA STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION reported in 2015 SCC OnLine KAR 5674.

¶29

Smt. Rashmi Patel, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3, and Sri Gopal Krishna Soodi, learned special counsel appearing for respondent No.4 are present before the Court physically, and press into service for consideration of the issues involved in this writ petition initiated by the petitioner against the respondents relating to the report submitted by the Human Rights Commission.

¶30

The said report is submitted for consideration by the competent authority in the State of Karnataka. In the judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the

¶31

¶32

WP No. 1404 of 2021

¶33

petitioner, at paragraph No.6, it has held that, "Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the order passed by the Human Rights Commission is more in the nature of recommendation, since he found prima-facie that persons were arrested without entering in the police register about the time of arrest." Further, at paragraph No.7, it has held that, "Therefore we are of the view that the writ petitions are premature in nature and we cannot interfere with the directions issued by the State Human Rights Commission. Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of".

¶34

The present writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. Article 226 of the Constitution of India gives High Courts the ability to issue instructions, orders, and writs to any person or authority, including the Government. Whereas, Article 227 of the Constitution of India gives High Courts the power of superintendence over all Courts and Tribunals in the

¶35

5 - WP No. 1404 of 2021

¶36

territory over which they have jurisdiction. Further, Article 21 of the Constitution of India provides for protection of life and personal liberty. However, that protection of life and liberty is applicable to both the parties, in a proceeding. Hence, this writ petition does not survive for consideration.

¶37

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of .

¶38

In the meanwhile, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks for liberty, same is accorded in

accordance with law.

Sd/JUDGE

Sd/JUDGE

KVK

S H Vasantha v. State of Karntaka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S H Vasantha v. State of Karntaka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Latha B R Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Ramappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Mohammed Ayaz Pasha Vs the Assistant Executive Engineer

The General Manager (P) Vs Sri Vijayabhaskar Shetty

Sri M Krishnamurthy Vs the Tahsildar

Anita W/O Ashok Dige, Vs Vithal S/O Malhari Gaiwad