Disposed

Smt. N Sowmyashree v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC10 Sept 2024WP/17631/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged police notices and summons requiring their presence at a police station without role in the case, alleging harassment. Court refused to quash notices but directed police to issue advance notice specifying time and record purpose and duration of summons to prevent harassment.

What did the court decide?

Court did not interfere with notice but directed police to issue advance notice specifying time and record purpose and duration of summons; any harassment to be viewed seriously.

Smt. N Sowmyashree Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:37120 WP No. 17631 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND

¶6

WRIT PETITION No. 17631 OF 2021 (GM-POLICE)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. N SOWMYASHREE, W/O MOHAN, D/O C. NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, RESIDENT OF No.273, 1^ST MAIN, 7^TH CROSS, HONGASANDRA, BENGALURU 560068.

¶9

Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶10

SMT. V. SWETHA, W/O H.N.SOMASHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, RESIDENT OF No.434/9, 1^ST MAIN, 7^TH CROSS, SUBBAIAH GARDEN LAYOUT, HONGASANDRA, BOMMANAHALLI, BENGALURU-560068.

¶11

SRI H. N. SOMASHEKAR, S/O C. NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, RESIDENT OF No.434/9, 1^ST MAIN, 7^TH CROSS, SUBBAIAH GARDEN LAYOUT, HONGASANDRA, BOMMANAHALLI, BENGALURU-560068.

¶12

…PETITIONERS

¶13

(BY SRI SIDDESHWARA N. K., ADVOCATE)

¶14

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:37120 WP No. 17631 of 2021

¶15

AND:

¶16

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001.

¶17

THE POLICE COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, INFANTRY ROAD, BANGALORE-560001.

¶18

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, EAST SOUTHERN DIVISION, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560025.

¶19

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, MICO LAYOUT DIVISION, BENGALURU 560025.

¶20

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BOMMANAHALLI POLICE STATION, BOMMANAHALLI, BENGALURU-560068.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI S.H. RAGHAVENDRA, AGA)

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT R-4 AND 5 TO CONDUCT INVESTIGATION IN CRIME No.112/2021 REGISTERED ON THE FILE OF RESPONDENT No.5 DATED 12.8.2021 VIDE ANNEXURE-D AS PER THE PROCEDURE PRESCRIBED IN CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW WITHOUT UNNECESSARILY HARASSING THE PETITIONERS BY ISSUING NOTICES AND CALLING UPON THEM TO VISIT THE POLICE STATION REGULARLY DESPITE THE PETITIONERS HAVE NO ROLE TO PLAY IN THE ABOVE SAID CRIME AND ETC.

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:37120 WP No. 17631 of 2021

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

Heard Sri Siddeshwara N.K., learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri S H Raghavendra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents.

¶29

The petitioners are seeking direction to respondent Nos.4 and 5 to conduct investigation in Crime No.112/2021 as per Annexure-D without unnecessarily harassing them.

¶30

It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent-Police authorities, in particular, respondent Nos.4 and 5 are issuing unnecessary notices requiring their presence. It is further submitted that the petitioners are made to sit in the Police Station without any reason. It is the further contention of the petitioners that they were made to visit the Police station during odd hours without any just reason.

¶31

Sri S H Raghavendra, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents would submit that petitioner No.3 is involved in crime and facing investigation.

¶32

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:37120 WP No. 17631 of 2021

¶33

He submits that more than six FIRs have been registered against him and investigation is in progress. The FIR in Crime No.198/2021 is registered by Varthur Police for the offences under Sections 323, 324, 354, 144, 147, 148, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(1)(r), (s), 3(2), (V-a) of SC/ST (PoA) Act, 1989, and the investigation is in progress. Petitioner No.3 is absconding. He further submits that as a part of investigation relating to FIRs as tabulated in the statement of objections by the State, petitioner Nos.1 and 2 were summoned after due notice.

¶34

Having regard to the submissions of learned Counsels for the parties and in view of the material on record, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the notice issued by respondent Nos.4 and 5. Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are not included as accused in the FIRs pending investigation against accused No.3. If the respondent authorities are of the opinion that the presence of petitioner Nos.1 and 2 is required for investigation in relation to the pending FIRs, it is open to respondent Nos.4 and 5 to summon petitioner Nos.1 and 2 for enquiry. However,

¶35

it is expected that advance notice shall be issued for their appearance. It is made clear that respondent Nos.4 and 5

¶36

NC: 2024:KHC:37120 WP No. 17631 of 2021

¶37

¶38

shall specify the time for appearance of petitioner Nos.1 and 2. As and when petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are summoned to the Police station for conducting enquiry, the Investigating Officer shall record the purpose of summoning petitioner Nos.1 and 2 and the time of their presence in the Police station. Any amount of harassment by the Police authorities to petitioner Nos.1 and 2 would be viewed seriously.

¶39

With the above observations, writ petition is disposed of.

¶40

Sd/(K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE

¶41

¶42

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51

Smt. N Sowmyashree v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. N Sowmyashree v. the 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

Smt. Dyamavva K v Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Prabhakumar Ramiah Mysore Vs the Insurance Regulatory

Sri Sanath Semitha M Vs Recovery Officer/Authorized Officer

The Dargah Hazrath Kaspeer Vs Smt. Syedani Bee

Sri P B Reddy Vs the Secretary

Smt. B L Sheela Vs the Union of India