Dismissed¶30

Sri M Gajendra v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 Dec 2025WP/18436/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru; WP No. 18436 of 2022 (GM-POLICE); Justice E.S. Indiresh; decided 11.12.2025. Mandamus refused: writ court declined Article 226 jurisdiction where disputed questions of fact exist and efficacious alternative remedy is available. Prayer was to direct Addl. Director General of Police (Court of Anti Corruption Bureau, Karnataka) and Inspector of Police, Adugodi Police Station, to consider complaints dated 04.02.2022 and 08.02.2022 (Annexure-Q and Q1). Petition dismissed; no costs or quantum.

What did the court decide?

Disputed questions of fact are involved in this writ petition, and the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy to take action against such respondents. ¶25

Sri M Gajendra Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:52924 WP No. 18436 of 2022

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 18436 OF 2022 (GM-POLICE)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI M GAJENDRA S/O LATE B MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT ANJENEYA TEMPLE STREET, 1ST CROSS, ADUGODI, BENGALURU - 560 030.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. SOMASHEKHARAIAH R.P., ADVOCATE) AND:

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶12

Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S Location: HIGH 2. THE ADDL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, COURT OF ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU, KARNATAKA KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. 3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ADUGODI POLICE STATION, ADUGODI, BENGALURU - 560 030.

¶13

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA)

¶14

¶15

NC: 2025:KHC:52924 WP No. 18436 of 2022

¶16

HC-KAR

¶17

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R2 AND R3 TO CONSIDER THE COMPLAINT LODGED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 04.02.2022 AND 08.02.2022 UNDER ANNEXURE-Q AND Q1 RESPECTIVELY.

¶18

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

¶19

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

¶20

ORAL ORDER

¶21

Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶22

In this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking

¶23

writ of mandamus to direct the respondent Nos.2 and 3 to consider the representations/complaints dated 04.02.2022 and 08.02.2022 (Annexure-Q and Q1 respectively).

¶24

Having taken note of the averments made in

¶25

the representations referred to above, I am of the view that, as the disputed question of facts involved in this writ petition and also, the petitioner have an efficacious

¶26

¶27

NC: 2025:KHC:52924 WP No. 18436 of 2022

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

remedy to take action against such respondents. I am of the view that, this Court cannot exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct the respondent-authorities to take action against respondents herein.

¶30

Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed .

¶31

Sd/(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

¶32

PSJ

¶33

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36 CT-SG

Sri M Gajendra v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri M Gajendra v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri K P Narasimha Murthy Vs Zonal Manager

Syed Khalim Vs the State of Karnataka

Sree Byraweshwara Vs the Secretary to the Government

Sri Gundu Rao D a Vs State Bank of India

Sri Govindraj N Vs the Bangalore City Co. Operative Bank Ltd.

M/S Saadhika Cretions Glass Pvt. Ltd. Vs Bank of Baroda