9 Sep 2025
Order issued
ConcludedThe High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru recorded adverse findings against police personnel.
adverse finding compensation.
Source: WP No. 11260 of 2025 (GM-POLICE)
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2025-0062Dakshina Kannada, KarnatakaJudgment 9 September 2025
Dakshina Kannada Man vs State Of Karnataka
The High Court allowed the writ petition holding the investigation in Crime No.91 of 2022 (Dharmasthala) was absolutely shoddy and directed re-investigation by a Special Investigation Team to be constituted within 4 weeks, to file its final report within 4 months, staying further proceedings in Special Case No.60 of 2023 till then.
Externally reportedV2
What this record means
This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.
How verification works →Detailed record
Report card
By judgment dated 9 September 2025 in WP No. 11260 of 2025 (GM-POLICE), the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru (Coram: M. Nagaprasanna, J.) adjudicated the matter concerning 2 police personnel, namely: Deputy Superintendent of Police, Bantwal Division, Dakshina Kannada; Deputy Superintendent of Police, DCRB, S.P. Office, Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore.
- Register number
- KA 19 CW 0004
- Case reference
- WP No. 11260 of 2025 (GM-POLICE)
- Court and date
- High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru (Coram: M. Nagaprasanna, J.), 9 September 2025
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Deputy Superintendent of Police, Bantwal Division, Dakshina Kannada; Deputy Superintendent of Police, DCRB, S.P. Office, Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Sections 302, 323, 392 r/w 34 IPC; the Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (POA) Act
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “what would unmistakably emerge is, absolute shoddy investigation.” (at para Judgment reasoning)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Adverse finding.
- Present status of the proceedings
- The judgment is recent and may be subject to appeal; the pendency of an appeal is not a finding.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Current position
Judgment dated 9 September 2025. This judgment may still be subject to appeal; initiation or pendency of an appeal is not a finding.
Evidence position
Recorded allegations
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported
Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.
Official finding: supports allegation.
Attributed to the court
What the court found
Holding not recorded separately.
“what would unmistakably emerge is, absolute shoddy investigation.” (para Judgment reasoning)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
Continuing record
Follow-up history
24 Sep 2026
(Swarm scout and independent verification pass (Muse Spark).)
Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.
Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.