Mr Suresh A R v. State of Karnataka

((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:40011( WP(No.(23261(of(2026( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010519062026( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

TH DATED(THIS(THE(30 (DAY(OF(JULY,(2026(

BEFORE(

THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(R.(NATARAJ(

WRIT(PETITION(NO.(23261(OF(2026((GM-POLICE)(

BETWEEN:(( ( MR.,SURESH,A.R., S/O,R.S.,REDDY,,, AGED,ABOUT,53,YEARS,,, R/AT,NO.,11,,DHATHRI,NEST,,, ST RATNAMMA,LAYOUT,,1 ,CROSS,ROAD,, MANORAYANAPALYA,,, BENGALURU-560032., …PETITIONER, (BY,SRI.,G.S.KANNUR,,SENIOR,ADVOCATE,FOR,, ,,,,,,SRI.,ABHINAY,S.,,ADVOCATE),

AND:( (

1., STATE,OF,KARNATAKA, BY,ITS,PRINCIPAL,SECRETARY,,, DEPARTMENT,OF,HOME,AFFAIRS,,, Digitally VIDHANA,SOUDHA,,, signedtiby BENGALURU-560,001.,HEMALATHA0J Location: , HIGH0COURT

2.,OF THE,COMMISSIONER,OF,POLICE,, KARNATAKA BENGALURU,CITY,,, NO.1,,INFANTRY,ROAD,,, BENGALURU-560,001., ,

3., THE,DEPUTY,COMMISSIONER,OF,POLICE,, NORTH,EAST,DIVISION,, ALLALASANDRA,,YELAHANKA,, BENGALURU-,560,065., ,

4., THE,ASSISTANT,COMMISSIONER,OF,POLICE,, SAMPIGEHALLI,SUB-DIVISION,,, THANISANDRA,MAIN,ROAD,,,

R.K. HEGDE NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 064. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHAMANTHA NAIK, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT RESPONDENT NOS. 2 TO 4 TO FORTHWITH CONSIDER THE PETITIONER'S COMPLAINT DATED 13.07.2026 AND REPRESENTATION DATED

24.07.2026, AND TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, INCLUDING REGISTRATION OF AN FIR (VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND D) AND ETC.

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

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondent No.4 to consider his complaint dated

13.07.2026 and representation dated

24.07.2026 and take suitable action in accordance with law. He has also sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent Nos.2 to 4 to provide adequate protection at the property mentioned in the schedule to the writ petition and to ensure compliance of the order dated 24.07.2026 passed by

the II Additional Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, in O.S.No.747/2026.

2.

(i) The petitioner claims that he is running a cricket academy in Sy.Nos.13 and 14 of Agrahara Badavane, Thirumenahalli, Thanisandra Main Road, Bengaluru - 560064. He contends that after entering into an agreement with the landowners, he has invested a sum of Rs.68,50,000/- for establishing the academy, which caters to hundreds of children who attend coaching daily. The petitioner claims that the landowners were driven by a desire to take over the infrastructure, business and goodwill built by him, started interfering with the running of the academy, which compelled him to file O.S.No.747/2026 before the II Additional Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru. The petitioner claims that the Civil Court passed an ex-parte order of interim injunction restraining the defendants therein (land owners) from interfering with the running of the academy in the aforesaid property. Immediately thereafter, the petitioner submitted written representation dated 24.07.2026 to the respondent No.4 enclosing therewith a copy of the Order dated

24.07.2026 passed in O.S.No.747/2026. Petitioner contends that even after the aforesaid representation was filed, the respondent No.4 did not take any action, but the harassment of the petitioner, his staff and the disruption of the coaching activities continued.

(ii) The petitioner therefore is before this Court seeking for a direction to the respondents to consider the representation and register FIR, if need be and take suitable action against the owners of the land and ensure protection to all those who attend the academy.

¶3Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner reiterated the above contentions.

¶4The learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents after securing instructions from the respondents submits that there are complaints and counter complaints lodged by the owners of the property and that the respondent No.4 would look into the matter and take necessary action. He contends that the order passed by the Civil Court is an ex-parte interim order and therefore, the respondents will

be careful while considering the representation of the petitioner.

¶5I have considered the submissions of the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents.

¶6When the petitioner has submitted a representation apprehending danger at the hands of a third party, the respondent No.4 is bound to act quickly and with alacrity so as to prevent any further damage or injury. If the petitioner has requested the respondent No.4 by a representation dated

24.07.2026, the respondents are bound to swing into action and give necessary protection and investigate the complaint and take suitable remedial action. They cannot sit over the representation of the petitioner unendingly and thereby expose the petitioner to further harassment at the hands of the perpetrators.

¶7In that view of the matter, the respondent No.4 is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated

24.07.2026 in accordance with law and take suitable action to

ensure the maintenance of law and order. This shall be complied forthwith.

This petition stands disposed off on the above terms.

Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE

PMR List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1