Smt. Roopavathi T v. The State of Karnataka

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 21923 OF 2026 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN:

SMT. ROOPAVATHI T W/O SRI. SHIVA KUMAR B.V., AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT 2ND FLOOR, NO. 94/C5, NEAR GANGADHARESHWARA TEMPLE, JARAGANAHALLI, 6TH PHASE, J.P. NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 078. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. G.M. SHARATHKUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶1THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶2THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE INFANTRY ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶3THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER (SHO) PUTTENAHALLI POLICE STATION, PUTTENAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 078.

by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶4SRI. SHIVAKUMAR B.V., S/O SRI. VEERABHADRAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 95/C5, 2ND FLOOR, NEAR GANGADHARESHWARA TEMPLE, JARAGANAHALLI, 6TH PHASE, J.P. NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 078.

¶5SRI. SRIDHAR B.V., S/O SRI. VEERABADHRAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 95/C5, 2ND FLOOR, NEAR GANGADHARESHWARA TEMPLE, JARAGANAHALLI, 6TH PHASE, J.P. NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 078.

¶6SRI. VEERABHADRAIAH S/O LATE EERAIAH AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 94/C5, NEAR CMS SCHOOL, CMS SCHOOL STREET, J.P. NAGAR 6TH PHASE, BENGALURU - 560 078. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SARITHA KULKARNI, AGA FOR R1 TO R3)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO I) QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 02.07.2026 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.3 (THE STATION HOUSE OFFIER, PUTTENAHALLI POLICE STATION) IN ANNX-C AS ARBITARY, ILLEGAL AND WITHOUT AUTHORITY OF LAW.

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 certiorari or any other appropriate writ, or direction quashing the impugned endorsement dated

02.07.2026 issued by respondent no.3 (The Station House Officer, Puttenahalli Police Station) in Annexure-C as arbitrary, illegal, and without authority of law. b. Issue a writ of mandamus commanding respondent no.3 to strictly implement and execute the operative mandates of the ex-parte order dated 22.11.2025 passed in Crl.Misc.No.197/2025 by Judicial Magistrate First Class (Traffic Court-V), Bengaluru in Annexure-B, and provide immediate, ongoing police protection to ensure the physical safety, restoration, and peaceful residence of the petitioner and her children at the shared household at no. 94/C5 (or 95/C5), near Gangadhareshwara Temple, Jaraganahalli, 6th phase, J.P.Nagar, Bengaluru -560 078. c. PASS such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice and equity.

¶2The petitioner had earlier approached this Court vide W.P.No.18382/2026, contending that the respondents

had not implemented exparte order dated

22.11.2025.

¶3Learned Additional Government Advocate on that occasion made a submission that there was representation which had been submitted by petitioner. If a representation were to be submitted, accompanied by necessary orders, the same would be considered.

¶4The petitioner is once again before this Court contending that despite the order dated 22.06.2026, endorsement at Annexure-C has been issued. A perusal of Annexure-C indicates that it is in view of the order passed by a co-ordinate bench of this Court dated 26.02.2026 in W.P.No.30153/2025 that the respondents have expressed their inability to take any further action on the oral request made by the petitioner.

¶5W.P.No.30153/2025 arose out of proceedings under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, wherein the husband of the petitioner had challenged an order passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner dated 09.07.2025 in MSC.No.51/2023 and an order dated 30.12.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner in Appeal No.MAG(4)(SC)CR:24/2024-25 and this Court, considering the various aspects, including the aspect of the petition having been filed against her husband and the father in Crime No.197/2025, observing

that the petitioner and her husband were harassing the senior citizen, including by filing a false case under Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 had directed the petitioner therein, i.e., the husband of the petitioner, to vacate and hand over the portion of the property, subject matter for the said proceedings by 30.05.2026 and further directed the jurisdictional police to intervene and ensure that the senior citizen has possession of the property.

¶6In the teeth of that order having been passed against the husband of the petitioner, the question of filing these proceedings seeking for police help after implementation of the order passed by the co-ordinate bench is, in the considered opinion of this Court, a gross abuse of the process of this Court.

¶7A litigant who approaches this Court in a genuine manner by disclosing all facts would always be entitled to consideration and grant of such orders as may be permissible. But when the litigants approach this Court by suppressing facts, more particularly the orders passed by a co-ordinate bench of this Court, it is but required for this Court to take necessary action against such litigants who have abused the process of Court.

¶8In that view of the matter, the above writ petition is dismissed by imposing an exemplary cost of Rs.25,000/- payable to the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority

within a period of 4 (four) weeks from today, i.e., on or before 24.08.2026.

¶9If the said payments are not made by 24.08.2026, the Member Secretary, Karnataka State Legal Service Authority would be entitled to initiate such proceedings as may be necessary to recover the said costs as arrears of land revenue from the petitioner.

Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

GJM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15