Karnataka High Court
CCC/343/2026 of SMT LAKSHMI S Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 15 July 2026
CNR: KAHC010197252026 NC: 2026:KHC:36222-DB CCC No. 343 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15 TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.343 OF 2026 BETWEEN:
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.343 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
1.
SMT. LAKSHMI .S
W/O LATE VENKATESHAMURTHY,
AGED 43 YEARS,
2.
PRANEETHA N.V.
D/O LATE VENKATESHAMURTHY,
AGED 13 YEARS,
(MINOR REP. BY MOTHER
SMT. LAKSHMI .S)
3.
JAYANTH N.V.
S/O LATE VENKATESHAMURTHY,
AGED 22 YEARS,
4.
HEMANTH N.V.
S/O LATE VENKATESHAMURTHY,
AGED 20 YEARS,
5.
NARASIMHAMURTHY N.V.
S/O LATE VENKATARAMANAIAH,
AGED 52 YEARS,
6.
GOVINDARAJU
S/O LATE VENKATARAMANAIAH,
AGED 50 YEARS,
7.
NARASIMHASWAMY
S/O LATE VENKATARAMANAIAH,
AGED 42 YEARS,
Digitally signed by
MAHALAKSHMI B M
Location: High Court
of Karnataka
HC-KAR
8.
SMT. RENUKA
W/O B. GOVINDARAJU,
AGED 47 YEARS,
9.
SMT. GANGAMBIKE
W/O GOVINDARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
10.
SMT. JAYAPRADHA
W/O DAYANANDA
AGED 40 YEARS,
ALL ARE R/O ADEPETE,
NEAR MARIYAKKA TEMPLE,
NELAMANGALA TOWN.
…COMPLAINANTS
(BY MR. VIJAY GOWDA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION & LITERACY
VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BENGALURU-560001.
…PRO FORMA RESPONDENT
2.
BYLANJINAPPA
THE ESTATE OFFICER &
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT,
K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560009.
3.
SRI K.C. RAMESH
THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER,
NELAMANGALA TALUK, NELAMANGALA,
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562123.
4.
SRI GANGABYLAPPA
THE GOVERNMENT MODEL PRIMARY SCHOOL,
NELAMANGALA TOWN,
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562123.
…ACCUSED
(BY SMT. B. SUKANYA BALIGA, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
HC-KAR
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE
CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO DIRECT PURGING OF
CONTEMPT AND DEAL WITH THE ACCUSED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW
AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT FOR
VIOLATING THE ORDERS PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN
W.P.NO.6356/2026 DATED 26.02.2026 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
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
(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)
1. The complainants have filed the present complaint alleging willful disobedience of the status quo order dated 26.02.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. No.6356/2026 [GM-PP].
2. The complainants allege that, despite the status quo order, the accused had carried on with the demolition and had also constructed a compound wall. The complainants have produced photographs stated to have been taken on 26.02.2026, which indicate that the pillars for the construction of the compound wall stand erected. It is stated by the accused that the construction of the compound wall was completed on 26.02.2026. The
HC-KAR
photographs stated to have been taken on 05.03.2026 have also been produced, which show cement poles being loaded or off loaded on or from a trolley attached to a tractor.
3. We note that the photographs submitted indicate that the compound wall comprises RCC pillars with sleeves slotted with precast concrete panels.
4. The accused have also filed an affidavit denying the allegation that any construction was carried out after the status quo order was communicated. The said affidavit also encloses with photographs showing the status of the compound wall.
5. The learned counsel for the accused disputes that the compound wall was constructed in a single day, i.e., on 26.02.2026.
6. We do not consider it apposite to adjudicate the said controversy, as it is prima facie clear from the photographs produced by the accused that no construction has been carried out after the status quo order. The photographs taken on 08.04.2026, 01.05.2026, 22.06.2026 and 09.07.2026 show that the status quo has been maintained and the land continues to be a vacant land.
HC-KAR
7. Accordingly, the complaint stands closed.
Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/- (K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE
MBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27