Monday, 01, Jun, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Sri Pradeep S vs The State Of Karnataka
2024 Latest Caselaw 18791 Kant

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 18791 Kant
Judgement Date : 26 July, 2024

Karnataka High Court

Sri Pradeep S vs The State Of Karnataka on 26 July, 2024

Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar

Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar

                                                -1-
                                                          NC: 2024:KHC:29651
                                                        WP No. 12912 of 2024



                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                             DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JULY, 2024

                                             BEFORE

                          THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

                          WRIT PETITION NO. 12912 OF 2024 (GM-POLICE)

                   BETWEEN:

                   SRI. PRADEEP S,
                   AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS,
                   S/O MAYILAPPA,
                   OLAMOGRU VILLAGE, PUTTUR TALUK,
                   DAKSHIN KANNADA DISTRICT,
                   DARBETADKA POST-574 201.
                                                                ...PETITIONER
                   (BY SRI. SUYOG HERELE E.,ADVOCATE)
                   AND:

                   1.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
                        REP BY ITS SECRETARY,
                        DEPARTMENT OF HOME,
                        2ND FLOOR, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
                        BENGALURU-560 001.
Digitally signed
by
LEELAVATHI S       2.   THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
R                       PUTTUR SUB-DIVISION,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF                PUTTUR-574 201.
KARNATAKA
                   3.   THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
                        PUTTUR SUB-DIVISION,
                        DAKSHINA KANNADA. 574 201.

                   4.   THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
                        PUTTUR TOWN PS, PUTTUR TALUK,
                        D.K-574 201.
                                                              ...RESPONDENTS
                   (BY SRI.S T NAIK.,AGA FOR R1-R4)
                                  -2-
                                                NC: 2024:KHC:29651
                                            WP No. 12912 of 2024



     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 24/04/2024 IN PROCEEDINGS BEARING
NO. ADS M.A.G.C.R /49/2023-24 PASSED BY THE R2 (PRODUCED
VIDE ANNEXURE-A) AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS
PURSUANT THERETO.

     THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM:     HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR


                           ORAL ORDER

In this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the

impugned externment order at Annexure-A dated 24/25.04.2024,

passed by the 2nd respondent under Section 55(a) and (b) of the

Karnataka Police Act, 1963 (for short "the K.P. Act").

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

AGA for the respondents and perused the material on record.

3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged

in the memorandum of petition and referring to the material on

record, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent directing externment

of the petitioner is not only contrary to the provisions and procedure

prescribed / contained in Sections 55 to 58 of the K.P. Act, but also

against the principles governing externment as enunciated by the

NC: 2024:KHC:29651

Apex Court in the case of Deepak vs. State of Maharashtra -

2022 SCC OnLine SC 99 which has been followed by this Court in

the case of Giddappa Vs. Lambu Giddappa Vs. State of

Karnataka and others - W.P.No.8182/2023 dated 21.04.2023 and

in the case of Shakeeb @ Mohammed Shakeebullah vs. State of

Karnataka & others - W.P.No.14426/2023 dated 28.11.2023. It is

therefore submitted that the impugned order passed by the

respondents deserves to be quashed.

4. Per contra, learned AGA for the respondents would

support the impugned order and submits that there is no merit in

the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

5. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the

petitioner, a perusal of the material on record including the

impugned order will clearly indicate that the 2nd respondent has

failed to follow the mandatory requirements and procedure

prescribed under Sections 55 to 58 of the Karnataka Police Act,

while passing the impugned order which is clearly contrary to the

principles enunciated by the Apex Court and this Court in the

judgments referred to supra. Under these circumstances, I am of

NC: 2024:KHC:29651

the view that the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent at

Annexure-A dated 24/25.04.2024 deserves to be quashed.

6. In the result, I pass the following:

ORDER

(i) Petition is hereby allowed.

(ii) The impugned order dated 24/25.04.2024 at Annexure-A

passed by the 2nd respondent is hereby quashed.

Sd/-

(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE BMC

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter