Allowed¶52

Sri Balakrishna v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC15 Sept 2025WP/26486/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Rowdy Register entry quashed; WP No. 26486 of 2025 (GM-POLICE); High Court of Karnataka; Article 226; ACP Sampigehalli Sub-Division order dated 21.08.2025; Amruthahally Police Station; Crime No.107/2024 (SS 417, 420, 468, 34 IPC); Crime No.156/2025 (SS 316(2), 318(4), 61(2) BNS); interim orders in Crl.P.No.1958/2025 and Crl.P.No.9567/2025; police intervention in civil dispute over sale agreement; notice dated 09.08.2025 quashed.

What did the court decide?

The third respondent's notice dated 09.08.2025 and the second respondent's order dated 21.08.2025 (Annexure-H), permitting entry of the petitioner's name in the Rowdy Registers, were quashed. ¶52

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

The third respondent's notice dated 09.08.2025 and the second respondent's order dated 21.08.2025 (Annexure-H), permitting entry of the petitioner's name in the Rowdy Registers, were quashed.

¶52

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner's name could be validly entered in the Rowdy Registers on the basis of Crime No.107/2024 and Crime No.156/2025 when investigation in both stands interdicted by this Court and the petitions remain pending. +1 more

¶50

Court's answer

Since investigation in both Crime No.107/2024 and Crime No.156/2025 had been interdicted by this Court and the petitions were pending, those proceedings could not have been the reason for entering the petitioner's name in the rowdy register.

¶50

Ratio / Principle

The second respondent's action in entering the petitioner's name in the rowdy register appeared to be an effort to intervene in a civil dispute, which the Court held cannot be.

¶50

Key takeaways

The petition is allowed, and the third respondent's notice dated 09.08.2025 and the second respondent's order dated 21.08.2025 are quashed.ratio¶58

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka High Court (B M Shyam Prasad, J.) allowed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by Sri Balakrishna challenging his entry in the Rowdy Registers. The impugned order dated 21.08.2025 of the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Sampigehalli Sub-Division (No.CC-4/NIL/ACP/SPH/2025, Annexure-H) rested on Crime No.107/2024 (Sections 417, 420, 468 and 34 IPC) and Crime No.156/2025 (Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 61(2) BNS) at Amruthahally Police Station. The Court observed that investigation in both crimes stood interdicted by its interim orders in Crl.P.No.1958/2025 and Crl.P.No.9567/2025, so the pending proceedings could not justify the rowdy-register entry; it further observed that the action seemed to be an effort to intervene in a civil dispute relating to an incomplete sale transaction, which cannot be. The third respondent's notice dated 09.08.2025 and the second respondent's order dated 21.08.2025 were quashed.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:36618 WP No. 26486 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 26486 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI BALAKRISHNA S/O DALAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS RESIDENT OF NO. 49, AK COLONY ROAD, 1ST MAIN ROAD, VEERANNAPALYA ARABIC COLLEGE POST, TANNARY ROAD BENGALURU-560045

¶10

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. MOHAMMED ABRAR S, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560001

¶15

¶16

NC: 2025:KHC:36618 WP No. 26486 of 2025

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF

¶19

POLICE OFFICE

¶20

OF ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE SAMPIGEHALLI SUB-DIVISION BENGALURU CITY-

¶21

PIN CODE-560064

¶22

THE POLICE INSPECTOR AMRUTHAHALLY POLICE STATION BENGALURU CITY.

¶23

PIN CODE-560092

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SMT. K. P. YASHODHA, AGA)

¶26

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AGAINST THE PETITIONER PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE SAMPIGEHALLI SUB-DIVISION VIDE NO.CC-4 /NIL/ACP/SPH/2025 DATED 21-08-2025 AT ANNEXURE-H IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶27

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FRESH

¶28

MATTERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶29

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

¶30

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:36618 WP No. 26486 of 2025

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

ORAL ORDER

¶33

The petitioner is aggrieved by the second respondent's order dated 21.08.2025, and the second respondent by this impugned order has permitted the petitioner's name to be entered in the Rowdy Registers. The second respondent has referred to the proceedings with the Amruthahally Police Station in Crime No.107/2024 and Crime No.156/2025. The first proceeding is for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420, 468 and 34 of IPC, and the next proceeding is for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 61(2) of the BNS.

¶34

Mr. Mohammed Abrar S, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that this Court must intervene and quash the impugned order dated 21.08.2025 for the following reasons.

¶35

a. The second respondent has permitted

¶36

entering the petitioner’s name in the

¶37

¶38

NC: 2025:KHC:36618 WP No. 26486 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

rowdy register because of two criminal proceedings which relate to a civil dispute.

¶41

b. The proceedings stem from the fact

¶42

that the complainant could not complete the sale transaction for an immovable property under a sale agreement, and therefore, the petitioner has completed the sale transaction with another.

¶43

c. This Court, in Crl.P.No.1958/2025 and Crl.P.No.9567/2025, has granted interim order staying further proceedings in both the afore mentioned criminal proceedings.

¶44

d. The petitioner, upon receipt of notice dated 09.08.2025, has furnished response on 20.08.2025, but the

¶45

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:36618 WP No. 26486 of 2025

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

second respondent has refused to

¶48

receive the same only to pass an order.

¶49

Mrs. K. P. Yashodha, the learned Additional

¶50

Government Advocate, is heard in the light of these submissions. This Court must observe that it is beyond dispute that this Court has interdicted investigation in both Crime No.107/2024 and Crime No.156/2025. If these proceedings are interdicted by this Court and the petitions are pending, it must follow that these proceedings could not have been the reason for entering the petitioner's name in the rowdy register. This Court cannot but observe that the second respondent's action seems to be an effort to intervene in a civil dispute, and that cannot be. In the circumstances, the following:

¶51

ORDER

¶52

a. The petition is allowed.

¶53

¶54

NC: 2025:KHC:36618 WP No. 26486 of 2025

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

b. The third respondent's notice dated

¶57