Manjunath M P Vs State of Karnataka

MANJUNATH M.P., S/O PUTTASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC:PRIVATE, R/AT NO.1715, 2^ND CROSS, YATHHAGADHAHALLI ROAD, ARKESHWARA NAGARA, MANDYA - 571 403.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. ANGAD KAMATH., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA,

¶14

Digitally signed bySUMA B N BY SATHANURU POLICE STATION,

¶15

Location: HIGH RAMANAGARA DISTRICT, COURT OF

¶16

KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶17

DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶18

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:34082 WP No. 28422 of 2023

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, CENTRAL RANGE, VASANTH NAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶21

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CHAIRMAN OF DISTRICT POLICE COMPLAINT AUTHORITY, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT, RAMANAGARA - 562 159.

¶22

SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, POLICE BHAVANA, B.M.ROAD, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT, RAMANAGARA - 562 159.

¶23

PRAKASH R, CIRCLE POLICE INSPECTOR, KANAKAPURA CIRCLE, KANAKAPURA, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117.

¶24

MURALI T, POLICE SUB INSPECTOR, SATHANURU POLICE STATION , SATHANAUR,

¶25

RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 120.

¶26

SUBHASH H.C. 270, SATHANURU POLICE STATION , SATHANAUR - 562 120, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 120.

¶27

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:34082 WP No. 28422 of 2023

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

KAILASH, H.C. 310, SATHANURU POLICE STATION , SATHANURU - 562 120, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 120.

¶30

SHEKAR, H.C 393, SATHANURU POLICE STATION , SATHANAUR, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 120.

¶31

MOHAN KUMAR, WRITER, CPI OFFICE, KANAKAPURA CIRCLE, KANAKAPURA, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117.

¶32

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R5)

¶33

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE R-5 AT ANNX-A AND CONSEQUENTLY ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE R-1 TO 5 TO ISSUE SANCTION TO PROSECUTE THE R-6 TO 11 BASED ON COMPLAINT DATED 19.10.2020 AT ANNEXURE - B AND ETC.,

¶34

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,

¶35

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶36

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶37

4 -

¶38

NC: 2026:KHC:34082 WP No. 28422 of 2023

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

ORAL ORDER

¶41

Petitioner, who was allegedly subjected to harassment

¶42

and abuse at the hands of Respondent Nos.6 to 11, is before this court seeking following reliefs:

¶43

"(a) Issue Writ of Certiorari quashing the Respondent No.5's Closure Report No.22 HCR (IGP//RG/GB/2023 dated 31.07.2023 at Annexure-T.

¶44

(b) Issue Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent No.1 to compensate the petitioner for the harassment, torture and pain caused by the Respondent Police to a sum of INR 40,00,000/(Rupees forty lakhs) and direct the Respondents to pay the same to Petitioner.

¶45

(c) Issue Writ of Mandamus directing the REspondent No.1 to conduct an independent enquiry.

¶46

(d) Pass such other and further order on the facts and circumstances of the case."

¶47

The brief facts of the case as narrated in the writ petition are:

¶48

(a) that on 01.03.2020, petitioner had entered into a marriage with one Deepika, daughter of Mr.Manjunath at Vadderahalli Village, Kannakapura Taluk, Ramanagara District. Within three months of their marriage, their marital relationship turned hostile and he was subjected to harassment at the

¶49

5 -

¶50

NC: 2026:KHC:34082 WP No. 28422 of 2023

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

hands of his wife and her relatives. He had also discovered certain material about the conduct and character of his wife and had confronted with the same on several occasions. Then on 18.06.2020, his wife deserted him and left the matrimonial home. Attempts to reconcile did not meet any desired results.

¶53

(b) Petitioner had caused issue of legal notice dated 14.07.2020 requesting his wife to co-operate in obtaining divorce by mutual consent. An untenable reply dated 04.08.2020 was issued raising false allegations against the petitioner. He was also threatened of dire consequences of foisting false criminal cases against him and his family members. That on 16.07.2020 he was stopped by two unknown persons who in the name of his wife threatened him of the consequences of he seeking divorce from his wife.

¶54

(c) On 18.07.2020 petitioner had lodged a complaint before the East Police Station, Mandya City, requesting protection from his wife and his family members. On 05.08.2020, statement of the petitioner's wife was recorded before the police station. Despite the aforesaid complaint and the recording of the statement, petitioner and his family

¶55

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:34082 WP No. 28422 of 2023

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

members continued to receive the threats, resulting in petitioner lodging another complaint on 16.08.2020. The complaint was referred to Women's and Child Welfare Department, Mandya on 31.08.2020. On 02.09.2020, the complaint was referred to Personal Counsellor at Vikasana Institute for Rural/Urban Development. Counseling sessions were held for both the petitioner and his wife.

¶58

(d) In the meanwhile on 16.09.2020, wife of petitioner had filed a false complaint against the petitioner and his family members before Respondent No.7-Sub-Inspector, Sathanur Police Station, Ramnagar District, which was registered in Crime No.128 of 2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 149 of IPC, Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. That on the same day, Respondent No. 8 along with Respondent Nos.9 and 10 came to the residence of the petitioner and coerced the petitioner into accompanying them to the police station for the purported purpose of interrogation. Petitioner was manhandled and was pushed into the car bearing number KA-11-M-4692, which belonged to the petitioner and ordered him to drive to the Sathanur Police Station. Petitioner was taken to the Sathanur Police Station

¶59

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:34082 WP No. 28422 of 2023

¶60

HC-KAR

¶61

where his wife and certain other persons including advocates and influential political personalities were present. Petitioner and his nephew who had accompanied him were subjected to derogatory abuses and threats.

¶62

(e) Petitioner was unlawfully detained overnight in the station. Petitioner was forced into signing blank notice letters to the police and he was sent back on the following day on 17.09.2020. Petitioner was thus illegally detained in the police station without being subjected to due process. A charge sheet was filed. Subsequently petitioner filed Criminal Petition No.7331/2021 before this court and this court by order dated 19.01.2026 allowed the same.

¶63

Counsel for the petitioner brings to the notice of this court, certain observations made by the Co-ordinate Bench of this court in said order dated 19.01.2024 regarding the manner and method in which the petitioner was arrested. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has also observed the high handed acts of the respondent-Police. Referring to the above and also relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the

¶64

case of RUDAL SAH vs. STATE OF BIHAR & Another

¶65

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:34082 WP No. 28422 of 2023

¶66

HC-KAR

¶67

reported in (1983) 4 SCC 141, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled for a compensation in a sum of Rs.40 lakhs for the harassment, torture and the pain caused by the respondent-Police. He also refers to a complaint dated 28.04.2023 submitted by the petitioner to the District Police Complaint Authority, Ramanagara District, which according to the counsel has not seen any progress till date. He submits that finding no other alternative, petitioner has approached this court invoking Public Law remedy for adequate compensation for petitioner being subjected to unlawful illegal detention and harassment.

¶68

Learned AGA opposing the petition submits that the relief sought for by the petitioner for payment of compensation in a sum of Rs.40 lakhs cannot be considered unless the allegation of illegal detention and harassment are enquired into and proved. He submits that since the petitioner has already filed a complaint before the District Police Complaint Authority, given some time and direction, enquiry will be conducted and appropriate orders in this regard will be passed.

¶69

Heard. Perused the records.

¶70

9 -

¶71

NC: 2026:KHC:34082 WP No. 28422 of 2023

¶72

HC-KAR

¶73

Facts narrated above do not require reiteration.

¶74

Since the petitioner is seeking compensation in the nature of payment of sum of Rs.40 lakhs, for he having purportedly been subjected to high handed illegal act at the hands of respondent-Police Authorities, it is necessary that an enquiry in this regard be conducted.

¶75

Inasmuch as the petitioner has already filed a complaint before the District Police Complaint Authority, in the light of submission made by the learned AGA, this Court deems it appropriate, without expressing any view on the merits or otherwise of the case, to direct the District Police Complaint Authority to enquire into the averments and allegations made in the said complaint in the manner known to law and after providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to present his case and after conducting such enquiry, pass appropriate reasoned orders within an outer limit of 6 months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.

¶76