SRIMAYA BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short grievance of the petitioner is as to non- consideration of his request of registration of the offence against the respondent Nos.2 to 13. Learned counsel for the petitioner banks upon the recommendation of the Superintendent of Printing and Registration dtd. 23/8/2019, a copy whereof avails at Annexure-H in support of his submission. Learned counsel also places reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in LALITA KUMARI VS. GOVERNMENT OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS [(2014) 2 SCC 1].

(2.) Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent, opposes the petition contending that whether an information should be registered as crime or not, is a matter left to the domain of the Investigating Officer and therefore a Writ Court may not interfere. Having so contended, now she fairly agrees to instruct her client to look into the grievance of the petitioner in accordance with law and in a time bound way. This is an appreciable gesture coming from the State.

(3.) In view of the above, writ petition is disposed off. Time for compliance/consideration is three months.