[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Suhail Sindagikar vs Additional Chief Secretary on 16 March, 2026
Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2421
WP No. 201203 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO. 201203 OF 2026 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
SUHAIL SINDAGIKAR
S/O MOHAMMAD SHAFI ALLABAKSH SINDGIKAR,
AGE: 32 YEARS,
OCC: ENGINEER
R/O JALNAGAR, WARD NO.22
VIJAYPUR - 586101
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. LIYAQAT FAREED USTAD, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed 1. ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY,
by NIJAMUDDIN
JAMKHANDI HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHAN SOUDHA,
Location: HIGH BANGALORE-500061.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
2. CHAIR PERSON / CHAIR MAN,
KARNATAKA HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION,
1ST TO 4TH FLOOR,
MULTI-STOREYED BUILDING,
5TH PHASE, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
NEAR VIDHAN SOUDHA,
BANGALORE 560001.
REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2421
WP No. 201203 of 2026
HC-KAR
3. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR,
KARNATAKA HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION,
BANGALORE-560001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI MALLIKARJUN SAHUKAR, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO -a)
QUASH THE ORDER DATED 19.11.2024 IN ORDER
NO.ºÉZï.Dgï.¹.¸ÀASÉå:4498/10/5/2022 c/w 165/10/5/2023 (©-3) PASSED
BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 CONSEQUENTLY ORDER IN RP NO.
42/2025 IN ºÉZï.Dgï.¹.¸ÀASÉå:4498/10/5/2022 (©-3) DATED 21.08.2025
VIDE ANNEXURE-E AND H. b) ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO
DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 TO CONSIDER THE
REPRESENTATION DATED 22.07.2024 AND THROUGH EMAIL
APPLICATION DATED 18.12.2025 VIDE ANNEXURE- D AND J.
C) GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS AND AS THIS HON'BLE
COURT MAY DEEM FIT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
ORAL ORDER
1. This writ petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the
Constitution of India, is filed seeking for the following reliefs:
(a) Quash the order dated 19.11.2024 in Order
No. ºÉZï.Dgï.¹.¸ÀASÉå:4498/10/5/2022 c/w 165/10/5/2023 (©-
3) passed by the respondent No.3 consequently order
in RP No.42/2025 in ºÉZï.Dgï.¹.¸ÀASÉå:4498/10/5/2022 (©-3)
dated 21.08.2025 vide Annexure-E and H.
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2421
HC-KAR
(b) Issue writ of mandamus to directing the
respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated
22.07.2024 and through email application dated
18.12.2025 vide Annexure-D and J.
(c) Grant such other relief's and as this
Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice
and equity.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
the learned Additional Government Advocate who is directed
to take notice for respondent No.1.
3. The petitioner had made a complaint to the State
Human Rights Commission alleging that, the police officials
attached to Jalanagar Police Station, Vijayapura had illegally
arrested him on 13.12.2022 and thereafter, detained him in
custody and tortured him.
4. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, as well as
the Additional Director of General of Police attached to the
State Human Rights Commission, Bengaluru, had submitted
two separate reports on 08.04.2024 and 10.04.2024 based
on the complaint of the petitioner and subsequently, the
respondent No.2 vide order at Annexure-F dated 11.04.2025
in proceedings bearing No.HRC No.4498/10/5/2022 c/w.
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2421
HC-KAR
165/10/5/2023 (B-3) had directed the State to pay a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation to the petitioner. Being not
satisfied with the compensation amount of Rs.1,00,000/-
awarded to the petitioner, as against his claim of
Rs.4,00,000/-, the petitioner is before this Court.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that,
as a result of the ill-treatment, the petitioner had suffered a
fracture injury for which he was treated in the hospital. The
respondent No.2 has failed to properly appreciate the
medical records of the petitioner and grant appropriate
compensation. He submits that, in the disciplinary
proceedings held against the erring Police Officers though
enquiry Officer has recommended for taking disciplinary
action against the said Officers, till date the disciplinary
authority has not passed any order.
6. Per contra, learned Additional Government
Advocate submits that, though alleged incident had taken
place on the Intervening night of 13.12.2022 and
14.12.2022, the petitioner has gone to the hospital for
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2421
HC-KAR
treatment only on 20.12.2022 and therefore it is very
apparent that it was an afterthought. The government
hospital in which he was treated has not given him a medical
certificate and on the other hand, he has now produced a
medical certificate from the private hospital. Before the
respondent No.2 he has not made any allegation of being
hospitalized or about suffering any fracture injury.
Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.
7. Perusal of the complaint made by the petitioner
before the respondent No.2 would go to show that, in the
said complaint, the petitioner has not made any statement
that he had suffered a fracture injury as a result of ill-
treatment by the Police Officers on the intervening night of
13.12.2022 and 14.12.2022. He has also not stated that, he
was admitted in any hospital for the injury suffered by him.
As rightly pointed out by the learned Additional Government
Advocate though the alleged incident had taken place on the
intervening night of 13.12.2022 and 14.12.2022, for the first
time, the petitioner had gone to the Government Hospital for
treatment only on 20.12.2022. The Doctor from the
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2421
HC-KAR
Government Hospital has not issued any certificate to the
petitioner that he had suffered fracture injuries and on the
other hand, the petitioner has now produced a certificate of a
private Doctor in support of his contention that, he had
suffered fracture injury in the incident in question.
8. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion
that, the compensation awarded by the respondent No.2 -
Commission is just and proportionate. If the disciplinary
authority has not passed any orders on the recommendation
of the Enquiry Officer, in the Department Enquiry
Proceedings that was held against the erring Police Officers,
it is needless to State that, the Disciplinary Authority shall
act upon the enquiry report at the earliest.
Sd/-
(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
JUDGE
Svh/-
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12
Ct:pk
