SRI MADESHA U vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60990-DB
WP No. 3720 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010079292025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 27 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
AND
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
WRIT PETITION NO. 3720 OF 2025 (S-KSAT)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI MADESHA U.,
S/O SRI. UNTHURAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
ASSISTANT SUB INSPECTOR,
MANDHYA WEST POLICE STATION,
MANDHYA DISTRICT,
R/AT POLICE QUARTERS,
HOUSE NO. 8
CAUVERY BUILDING, C BLOCK,
OPPOSITE PS ENGINEERING COLLEGE,
MANDHYA- 571 421.
Digitally
signed by
AASEEFA
PARVEEN
Location:
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA
2. SRI. MALLIKARJUNA CHULUKI,
S/O SRI. SOMAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
CIVIL POLICE CONSTABLE - 140,
HALAGURU POLICE STATION,
MALAVALLI TALUK,
MANDHYA DISTRICT
R/AT NEAR VEERABHADRESHWARA TEMPLE,
HALAGURU HOBLI, MALAVALLI TALUK,
MANDHYA DISTRICT - 571 421
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. PRASHANTH H. S., ADVOCATE)

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60990-DB
WP No. 3720 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010079292025
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
TO GOVERNMENT HOME DEPARTMENT,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDI,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2.
THE DIRECTOR GENERAL AND
INSPECTOR GENERAL, OF POLICE
IN KARNATAKA, NRUPATUNGA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
3. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
SOUTH RANGE,
MYSURU - 570 001.
4. THE DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY
AND THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF
POLICE,OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF
POLICE, SOUTH RANGE,
MYSURU - 570 001.
5.
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
MANDHYA DISTRICT,
MANDHYA 571 421
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 09.11.2025 PASSED BY THE KSAT AT
BENGALURU IN A.No-4709 AND 4710/2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-A
AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE SAID APPLICATION.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN B-GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60990-DB
WP No. 3720 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010079292025
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
and
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)
The petitioners, unsuccessful applicants before the
Tribunal are before this Court aggrieved by order dated
09.01.2025 in Application Nos.4709 and 4710/2024,
whereunder the petitioners' prayer for quashing Articles of
Charge dated 18.05.2024 (Annexure-A6) is rejected.
2. Heard learned counsel Sri.H.S.Prashanth, for
petitioners through video conference and learned AGA
Sri.Vikas Rojipura, for respondents.
3. Learned counsel Sri.H.S.Prashanth would
submit that identical charge sheet was issued to the
petitioners dated 06.02.2019 which was the subject
matter of application before the Tribunal in Application
Nos.1400 and 1401/2023 and the Tribunal vide order
dated 02.11.2023 quashed the Articles of Charge with a

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60990-DB
WP No. 3720 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010079292025
direction to the respondents to pay all consequential
including financial benefits to which the petitioners are
legally entitled to. Therefore, learned counsel would
submit that the respondents could not have issued fresh
Articles of Charge dated 18.05.2024 (Annexure-A6).
Learned counsel referring to order of the Tribunal dated
02.11.2023 (Annexure-A5) submits that the Tribunal had
not granted any liberty. In that circumstances he would
submit that issuance of Articles of Charge dated
18.05.2024 is one without jurisdiction and the same
requires to be quashed. Further, learned counsel would
submit that on merits also the Articles of Charge would not
be maintainable and as such he would pray for allowing
the writ petition.
4. Per contra, learned AGA would support the
order passed by the Tribunal and submit that the Articles
of Charge issued on 06.02.2019 was quashed by the
Tribunal by its order dated 02.11.2023 in Application
Nos.1400 and 1401/2023 solely on the ground of

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60990-DB
WP No. 3720 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010079292025
competency. Learned counsel would submit that the
Articles of Charge was quashed on the finding that the
same was issued by an incompetent authority. Learned
AGA would submit that when the Articles of Charge are
quashed solely on the ground of incompetency, there is no
bar for competent authority to issue Articles of Charge and
proceed with the enquiry. Thus, learned AGA would pray
for dismissal of writ petition.
5. Having heard the learned counsels for the
parties and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers,
we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order
passed by the Tribunal. Admittedly Articles of Charge
dated 06.02.2019 (Annexure-A1) was issued to the
petitioners and the same was the subject matter of
Application Nos.1400 and 1401/2023. The Tribunal by
order dated 02.11.2023 quashed the Articles of Charge
holding that the Articles of Charge is issued or framed by
an incompetent authority i.e. not by the disciplinary
authority. It is true that no liberty is reserved to the

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60990-DB
WP No. 3720 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010079292025
respondents to issue fresh Articles of Charge. In the facts
and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that
no liberty would be necessary when the Articles of Charge
are quashed solely on the ground of competency. When
the Tribunal has quashed the Articles of Charge on the
ground of competency, it would not bar issuance of
Articles of Charge by competent authority. In the instant
case, now the Articles of Charge dated 18.05.2024
(Annexure-A6) is issued by Disciplinary Authority. As such,
there is no merit in the contention of the petitioner that no
liberty was granted in the earlier proceedings.
6. With regard to merit of the Articles of Charge,
we are of the opinion that at this stage this Court under
Article 226 would not go into the merit or otherwise of the
charges alleged against the petitioners. It is for the
Enquiring Officer to enquire and give a finding on the
material that would be placed by both the parties. The
Hon'ble Apex Court has made it clear that Articles of
Charge could be interfered with at the threshold only if it

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60990-DB
WP No. 3720 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010079292025
is established that the Articles of Charge is issued by
mala-fide
incompetent authority or with . In the instant
case, it is not the case of the petitioners that it is by
incompetent authority or Articles of Charge are issued with
mala-fide
intention.
7. In the said circumstances, we find no merit in
the writ petition and accordingly the writ petition stands
rejected.
All contentions of the parties are left open.
Sd/-
(S.G.PANDIT)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
AP
CT:TSM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18