Karnataka High Court
WP/29044/2026 of SRI MANU D H @ CANDY Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 16 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010639472026 NC: 2026:KHC:50420 WP No. 29044 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT PETITION NO. 29044 OF 2026 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: SRI. MANU D. H. @ CANDY, S/O HEMANTH KUMAR
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
WRIT PETITION NO. 29044 OF 2026 (GM-POLICE)
BETWEEN:
SRI. MANU D. H. @ CANDY,
S/O HEMANTH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
R/AT, DASARAKOPPALU, NEXT TO RAM MANDIR, HASSAN CITY - 573 201.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. GAURAV SUBRAMANYAM., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY SUPERINTENDANT OF POLICE HASSAN DISTRICT
REP. BY SPP BENGALURU - 01
HIGH COURT BUILDING.
2.
POLICE INSPECTOR
HASSAN EXTENSION POLICE STATION
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. G. HARISHA B. S. AGA)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF
CERTIORARI OR IN THE NATURE THEREOF OR ANY OTHER
APPROPRIATE WRIT, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER IN
CASE
NO.MAG-1/HASSAN/EXTERNMENT-16/2026
DATED
14.08.2026 (ANNEXURE-A) PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1
AND ETC.
THIS
PETITION,
COMING
ON
FOR
PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: "a. Issue writ of certiorari or in the nature thereof or any other appropriate writ, quashing the impugned order in case No.MAG- 1/HASSAN/EXTERNMENT-16/2026 dated 14.08.2026 (Annexure-A) passed by the respondent No.1.
b. Pass such an order which is deemed to be fit in the nature and circumstances of the above case, in the interest of justice and equity."
2. The petitioner seeks to impugn the order dated 14.08.2026 (Annexure A to the writ petition), which is passed under Section 55 of the Karnataka Police Act, 19631.
3. Although the remedy of appeal is available to the petitioner under Section 55 of the Act, the primary contention urged on behalf of the petitioner is that although he was notified of the proceedings initiated by respondent No.1, due to unavoidable circumstances he 1 Hereinafter referred to as 'Act'
HC-KAR
could not appear before respondent No.1 and hence he did not have an adequate opportunity to contest the proceedings initiated under Section 55 of the Act.
4. It is further sought to be contended on behalf of the petitioner that the respondent No.1, who is the Superintendent of Police, did not have jurisdiction to initiate the proceedings under Section 55 of the Act. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment in the case of Chandrakant Shankar Vaddar Vs. State of Karnataka and others2.
5. In view of the aforementioned, on the limited ground that the petitioner did not contest the proceedings initiated against him under Section 55 of the Act and having regard to the contention of jurisdiction raised by the petitioner, which goes to the root of the matter, it is expedient that the relief sought for in the present petition be granted.
2 Order dated 24.08.2026 passed in WP.No.104096/2026
HC-KAR
6. Hence, the following:
ORDER
i. This writ petition is partly allowed.
ii. The order dated 14.08.2026 (Annexure-A to the writ petition) passed by the respondent No.1 is hereby quashed.
iii. It is open to the concerned respondents to issue fresh notice to the petitioner under Section 55 of the Karnataka Police Act, and conduct further proceedings in accordance with law after affording an adequate opportunity to the petitioner.
iv. All contentions on the merits of the matter are kept open.
(C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE
TIN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15