(BY MR. LENITA MATHIAS., ADVOCATE) v. (BY SMT.SARITHA KULKARNI, AGA FOR R.1 TO R5)

MR. NELIN BABU YARLAGADDA, S/O VEERULLU YARLAGADDA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, SITE NO.2, VIKYATH IRIS BUILDING, RELIANCE SMART BASEMENT, KODIGEHALLI MAIN ROAD, AYYAPPA NAGAR, K.R. PURAM, BENGALURU - 560 036. (BY SMT.SARITHA KULKARNI, AGA FOR R.1 TO R5) …RESPONDENTS THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO I) DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS COMMANDING THE R-5 TO REGISTER AN FIR AGAINST R-6 TO R-11 BASED ON THE PETITIONER COMPLAINT DATED 01.09.2025 - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:7884 WP No. 28534/2025 HC-KAR UNDER THE RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE S/ST ACT AND BNS ANNEXURE 'B'. II) DIRECT THE R-3 AND R-4 TO DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE/ASST. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE TO MONITOR THE INVESTIGATION. III) DIRECT THE R-1 TO PROVIDE IMMEDIATE PROTECTION TO THE PETITIONER AND HIS FAMILY FROM THE R-6 TO R-11. IV.) DIRECT THE DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT TO INITIATE ACTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioner asserts possession of a certain immovable property and pleads grievance stating that despite overt acts to encroach upon his land taking advantage of the fact that the petitioner hails from a Scheduled Caste, no action is taken by the Police as is required under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. This Court, after hearing Ms. Mathias, the learned counsel the petitioner, has called upon - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:7884 WP No. 28534/2025 HC-KAR Mrs. Saritha Kulkarni, learned Additional Government Advocate, to secure instructions from the third respondent on the action taken. On instructions from Mr.Jagadish, the Police Inspector, Avalahalli Police, Mrs. Saritah Kulkarni submits that FIR in Crime No.51/2026 is registered after this Court's order, and when queried, the learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the third respondent would oversee the investigation as is required under the relevant statutory Rules. These submissions are taken on record and the petition stands disposed of. It is needless to observe that this Court has not made any observation on the merits of the petitioner's complaint. SD/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA List No.: 3 Sl No.: 4