Sri Chinna C N v. State of Karnataka

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 17331 OF 2026 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN:

SRI CHINNA C N S/O NANJAN AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT CHIKKABALLI VILLAGE, KEREGODU HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK AND DISTRICT - 571 446.

PRESENTLY R/AT ATHREYA LODGE, NEAR RAMAMANDIRA, DHARMASTALA, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 216. …PETITIONER (BY SMT.VRINDA GROVER, ADVOCATE (THROUGH VC) FOR SMT.CHANDANA H.B., ADVOCATE)

AND:

¶1STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF HOME MINISTER, VIDHANASOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001. REP. BY ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY HOME.

¶2THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MANGALURU, D.K DISTRICT - 575 001.

by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶3THE SPECIAL INVESTIGATING TEAM, BELTHANGADY, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 214. REP. BY ITS CHIEF.

¶4THE DHARMASTALA POLICE STATION DHARMASTALA, BELTHANGADY TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 216. REP. BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.N.JAGADEESH, SPP ALONG WITH SRI MOHAMMED JAFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; SRI RAJASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.KEERTHAN KUMAR.K., ADVOCATE FOR PROPOSED RESPONDENT IN I.A.NO.1/2026; SRI.BALAN, ADVOCATE FOR PROPOSED RESPONDENT IN I.A.NO.2/2026)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO FILE A FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.39/2025 DHARMASTHALA POLICE STATION TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST THE CONSPIRATORS NAME IN THE PRELIMINARY ENQUIRY REPORT VIDE ANNEXURE-C DATED

19.11.2025 RESPONDENT NO.4 TO CONSIDER THE COMPLAINT DATED

18.12.2025 IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW VIDE ANNEXURE-D; DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO COMPLETE THE INVESTIGATION EXPEDITIOUSLY AND SUBMIT THE FINAL REPORT BEFORE THE COURT AT BELTHANGADY AT THE EARLIEST IN THE CRIME NO.39/2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-B DATED 04.07.2025.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

ORAL ORDER

¶1Petitioner is before this court seeking for the following reliefs: a) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the Respondent No.3 to file a final report in Crime No.39/2025 Dharmasthala Police Station to take action against the conspirators named in the Preliminary Enquiry report, vide Annexure-C, dated 19.11.2025. Respondent No.4 to consider the complaint dated 18.12.2025 in accordance with law vide Annexure-D. b) Issue a writ of mandamus, directing the Respondent No.3 to complete the investigation expeditiously and submit the final report before the Court at Belthangady at the earliest in the Crime No.39/2025, vide Annexure-B dated

04.07.2025. c) Issue any other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper relief's as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper under the circumstances of this case.

¶2I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2026 have been filed by a person against whom allegations have been made in para 30 of the writ petition, which reads as under:

"30. The Petitioner submits that he informed the Chairman of the Special Investigation Team about the alleged conspiracy orchestrated by the aforesaid persons. Reposing trust and confidence in the officers of SIT, the Petitioner disclosed all relevant facts before them. At this point of time it is relevant to state that out of curiosity, the petitioner asked Mahesh Shetty Thimarodi and Girish Mattannavar about their source of income to conduct this frivolous litigation. It is further submitted that initially, they were reluctant to discuss about the same and even they did not inform the source. However, later on when they realized that the petitioner would give statement against Shree Kshethra Dharmasthala, Dr.D.Veerendra Hegde and his family members they disclosed that they are receiving funds from Kerala and their major source of income is from one Smt.Rama Nagaraj from Chitradurga. Subsequently, the petitioner came to know that Girish Mattannavar and Mahesh Shetty Thimarodi are regular contact with the said Smt.Rama Nagaraj and she used to send funds to them so as to bring disturbance to the sanctity of Shree Kshethra Dharmasthala".

¶3The submission of Ms.Vrinda Grover, learned counsel for the impleading applicant in I.A.No.1 of 26 is that, there being false allegations, which have been made against the impleading applicant, necessary action has to be taken. If at all, the impleading applicant is aggrieved by any false statement made in the writ petition or otherwise, it would always be available for the impleading

applicant in I.A.No.1 of 26 as also in I.A.No.2 of 2026 to initiate such proceedings as may be advisable and permissible under law.

¶4It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the allegations made in the writ petition.

¶5The learned SPP submitted that according to the State, the final report had been submitted in November 2025 itself. What was only pending was the filing of the FSL report. His submission is that, the FSL report was filed on 15.07.2026. Thus, the entirety of filing the final report is completed rendering the above petition infructuous.

¶6The reliefs, which have been sought for has been extracted above and what has been essentially sought for, is a mandamus directing the completion of the investigation.

¶7The petition having been filed on 08.06.2026, report was filed in November, 2025 and FSL report was filed on 15.07.2026. The above petition has been filed prior to the filing of the FSL report. The prayers, which have been sought for in the petition stands infructuous.

¶8Placing the said submission of the learned SPP on record, writ petition along with impleading applications stand disposed.

Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

DH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25