OWAIS SABIR HUSSIAN Vs. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner filed the present Writ Petition for a writ of mandamus directing 1st respondent Government of Karnataka to pay compensation of Rs.25.00 lakhs to him for the custodial torture committed by erring officials respondent Nos.6 to 10 and to direct respondent Nos.2 to 4 to conduct departmental enquiry against respondent Nos.6 to 10 for their omission and commission and initiate contempt proceedings against respondent Nos.6 to 10 for willfully disobeying the guidelines laid down by the Hon ble Apex Court in the matter of D.K.BASU VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL, 1997 AIR(SC) 610.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that he is a small time businessman hailing from very respectable family and his father was a freedom fighter. He has three brothers and one sister. His elder brother is well known for whistleblower and his sister is a practicing advocate in the High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore. His family is known for integrity and honesty in the public life and naturally they are very active in anticorruption agitations. It is further contended that his elder brother is a well known social activist and anticorruption crusader and fighting against the corruption for the past 20 years. He is the founder of anticorruption prevailing in all walks of life. He is the petitioner in Infamous Sampangi bribery case wherein the Hon ble Special Court for Lokayuktha, Bangalore has convicted the former sitting MLA of KGF Mr.Y.Sampangi under the provision of Prevention of Corruption Act. He is either complainant or witness in high profile CBI cases and it is further contended that he is one of the witnesses in sensational 2G spectrum case which is registered by the CBI against the mighty politicians and top bureaucrats.

(3.) It is the further case of the petitioner that due to his constant fight against corruption, he and his family members have invited number of enemies from the people, who are in power as well as corrupt police officials. Considering serious threat perception by those people to the brother of complainant and their family, this Court has directed the Government of Karnataka to provide Y category security round the clock. Accordingly, they have been provided with Y category security and it is still continued. It is further contended that the petitioner and his family members have collected number of documents pertaining to the nefarious activities of the some of the Police Personnel, Bangalore City and those documents were kept by them at their house. Further it is stated that the father of the complainant sent a memorandum to the then Chief Justice of High Court of Karnataka and in turn the office of the Hon ble Chief Justice sent a letter stating that under Chapter XII Rule 3 of High Court of Karnataka Rules, letters cannot be accepted and treated as petition and further it was informed that petition can be filed in accordance with the High Court of Karnataka Rules, if he so desires.