M/s. Resource Money Power Infotec Pvt. Ltd. vs The State of Karnataka

B.S. Patil

Learned Government Pleader is directed to take notice for the respondents.

Petitioner is a company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act. According to the petition averments, due to business rivalry between the petitioner-Company and other similarly placed companies, taking note of some false and baseless allegations made, alleging offences of cheating, some of the police in various police stations across the state have resorted to unwarranted and illegal raids holding out threats of closing down their establishment.

It is contended by the petitioner that though the petitioner-Company is carrying on its lawful business in accordance with law the action of the police in carrying out illegal raids and holding out threats of imminent closure of their establishment has deprived them of their fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India. Petitioner has also made allegations stating that cases are planted against the company only for the purpose of harassing them with ulterior motive without any genuine reason. It is in this background that the petitioner has sought for a direction against the respondents not to interfere in the conduct of their business by indulging in raids, recoveries, arrests, detention etc., on the basis of complaints received against the petitioner without conducting necessary enquiry by giving fair and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. Petitioner has also made grievance about the press statements being given against the petitioner-Company by the police.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without affording any opportunity to the petitioner and without finding out the truth or the genuineness in the complaints received against the petitioner, the concerned police cannot harass the petitioner by conducting raids and arresting officials of the Company. He further contends that the image of the petitioner Company is tarnished on account of the press statements given by the police in connection with the false allegations made against the petitioner.

Learned Government Pleader submits that the petitioner is not entitled for such vague and general reliefs as sought in the writ petition without making specific allegations against any particular police who have indulged in the alleged illegal acts of conducting raids, recoveries and arrests of the officials of the petitioner-Company.

Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on careful perusal of the pleadings. I find that the allegations and assertions made in the petition are too general and vague. If at all the petitioner has any specific grievance against any particular police or police station or officers of the particular police station petitioner-Company has to first approach the higher authority and make a representation mentioning the nature of harassment allegedly met out and request them to take action against the erring officers. If no action is taken by the higher officers, then the petitioner-Company can approach this Court seeking necessary direction.

In the instant case, though the petitioner has made the Director General of Police. Bangalore and the Principal Secretary. Department of Home Affairs, Government of Karnataka. Bangalore as party respondents 1 and 2, there is nothing to show that any representation was given to them bringing to their notice the alleged illegalities committed by the police personally directed against the petitioner-Company. In the absence of such foundation laid in the pleadings, the prayer as sought in the writ petition cannot be granted. If the petitioner is really harassed by the police by resorting to illegal acts, it is open to the petitioner to approach the 1st respondent giving detailed representation in this regard. If such a representation is given, the 1st respondent, I am sure will take action in accordance with law.

With the above observations, this writ petition is disposed of declining to interfere in the matter.

Learned Government Pleader is permitted to file memo of appearance within three weeks.