Karnataka High Court
Shri. Ashok Sidram Wadeyar vs The Superintendent Of Police on 6 November, 2024
Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur
Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16195
WP No. 104779 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 104779 OF 2024 (GM-POLICE)
BETWEEN:
1. SHRI ASHOK SIDRAM WADEYAR,
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. YALPARATTI-591311,
TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
2. SHRI CHANDAR SIDRAM WADEYAR,
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. YALPARATTI-591311,
TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
3. SHRI MALAKARI RAMAPPA WADEYAR,
AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. YALPARATTI-591311,
TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
MALLIKARJUN
RUDRAYYA
KALMATH 4. SHRI ANIL MALAKARI WADEYAR,
Location: HIGH AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD
R/O. YALPARATTI-591311,
BENCH
TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
5. SHRI MARUTI MALAKARI WADEYAR,
AGE: 80 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. YALPARATTI-591311,
TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
6. SHRI KUMAR MARUTI WADEYAR,
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. YALPARATTI-591311,
TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16195
WP No. 104779 of 2024
7. SHRI PRAKASH MARUTI WADEYAR,
AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. YALPARATTI-591311,
TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
8. SHRI SHEKHAR SHRIMANT WADEYAR,
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. YALPARATTI-591311,
TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
9. SHRI SANTHOSH SHRIMANT WADEYAR,
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. YALPARATTI-591311,
TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
10. SHRI MAHANTESH SHRIMANT WADEYAR,
AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. YALPARATTI-591311,
TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
11.
10. SHRI JAGADISH SHRIMANT WADEYAR,
AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. YALPARATTI-591311,
TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
12.
11. SHRI ANAND SHRIMANT WADEYAR,
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. YALPARATTI-591311,
TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI SHRIHARSH A. NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE,)
AND:
1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
BELAGAVI DISTRICT, BELAGAVI-590001,
TQ/DIST: BELAGAVI.
2. THE POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR,
HARUGERI POLICE STATION,
HARUGERI-591220,
TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI V.S. KALASURAMTH, HCGP.)
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16195
WP No. 104779 of 2024
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR
ORDER IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE
RESPONDENTS TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST THE ACCUSED
MENTIONED IN THE COMPLAINT DATED 26.03.2024 BY
CONSIDERING THE SAID COMPLAINT AS PER ANNEXURE-E AND
ETC.,.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the
learned HCGP for respondents No.1 and 2.
2. This petition is filed by the petitioners seeking a
writ of mandamus for a direction to the respondent
authorities to take action on the basis of the complaint dated
26.03.2024. The petitioners contend that their forefathers
are the trustees of Aranya Sidda Deva Temple at
Khemalapur and Yalaparatti village and they are performing
pooja of the said deity without any obstructions. Petitioners
were constrained to initiate a suit in O.S.No.24/1984 before
the Civil Court for the relief of permanent injunction against
the rival party and the said suit came to be decreed on
17.04.1985. The defendants therein filed a suit in
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16195
O.S.No.47/1973 before the Principal Munsiff, Chikodi, for
permanent injunction not to interfere with the performance
of pooja in this Aranya Sidda Deva Temple. The said suit also
came to be decreed, confirmed in R.A.No.143/1981, which
was assailed in RSA No.297/1987 and the same came to be
dismissed affirming the judgment and decree passed by the
trial Court. Thereafter the petitioners filed another suit in
O.S.NO.146/2018, seeking for the relief of declaration that
they are the owners and for consequential relief of
permanent injunction. The said suit is pending consideration,
which is pending between the rival parties.
3. This being the state of affairs, petitioners have
lodged a complaint on 26.03.2024 before the 2nd respondent
to initiate action against one Chamaraj Kushal Wadeyar and
others and it is the grievance of the petitioners that the said
complaint has not acted upon by the respondents. Hence,
they are before this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that
since several decades there are disputes between rival
parties with regard to conducting pooja and suits are being
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16195
filed and injunctions having been obtained by both parties at
one time or the other. Presently a suit is filed which is
pending adjudication for the relief of declaration and
permanent injunction, wherein no temporary injunction or
relief is granted. Under the circumstances, the present
complaint is filed to take action against the rival party.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP appearing for
respondents submits that this is not the first time that the
issue has cropped up between the rival parties, i.e., the
petitioners and the persons alleged to be interfering and the
respondent police have initiated proceedings under section
107 of Cr.P.C. to maintain peace and tranquility in the area
and not to create any law and order situation. One such
preventive action, report has been filed dated 10.03.2024
and the parties are advised not to create any law and order
situation. It is also submitted by learned HCGP that in case
there is any disturbance that is created, the petitioners
would be at liberty to avail the remedy available to them in
the Civil Court by approaching the Court for necessary relief
in the pending litigation rather than filing this complaint as
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16195
the respondents cannot decide as to who are the authorised
persons legally entitled to perform the pooja.
6. Under the circumstances, this petition is
disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioners to approach
the Civil Court to obtain necessary interim orders as advised
and in the manner known to law.
7. In the meanwhile, the respondents shall direct
both the parties once again pursuant to the complaint dated
26.03.2024 and shall initiate proceedings under section 107
of Cr.P.C. for both the parties to maintain peace and
tranquility as the Temple is involved in the litigation,
involving several devotees visiting the temple to pay
obeisance.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)
JUDGE
MRK
CT-MCK
