High Court of Karnataka — Writ Petition No.5664 of 2025 (GM-RES): Summary of Opinion

Factual and Procedural Background

The petitioner filed Writ Petition No.5664 of 2025 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and under Section 528 of the BNSS (as stated in the source) seeking a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing Respondent Nos.1 to 5 to delete and mask her name from internet/digital records maintained by them which pertain to the petitioner in respect of NCB-Crime No.48/1/21/2023/BZU on the file of Respondent No.2.

The matter came up for preliminary hearing before Hon'ble Mr Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar, and an oral order was pronounced on 27 February 2025. The court noted that the issue was covered by an earlier judgment of this Court (see the Precedents section below) and proceeded to dispose of the petition accordingly.

Legal Issues Presented

1. Whether Respondent Nos.1 to 5 are required to delete and mask the petitioner's name from the internet/digital records maintained by them in relation to NCB-Crime No.48/1/21/2023/BZU on the file of Respondent No.2.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court's reasoning, as recorded in the opinion, is brief and procedural. The steps set out by the court are as follows:

• The court identified the central issue raised by the petition (the deletion/masking of the petitioner's name from internet/digital records pertaining to the specified NCB criminal matter).
• The court observed that the issue is "directly and squarely covered" by the earlier judgment in W.P.No.25557/2023 dated 28.02.2024 (Mr.XXXX v. Registrar General, High Court of Karnataka and others).
• On that basis — i.e., applying the earlier judgment to the present facts — the court concluded that the present petition deserves disposal in accordance with that precedent and therefore allowed the petition.
• No additional legal analysis, factual findings beyond the application of the cited judgment, or elaboration of legal principles is contained in the text of the opinion.

Holding and Implications

Holding: The petition is allowed and disposed of in terms of the judgment in Mr.XXXX v. The Registrar General, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru and others — W.P.No.25557/2023 dated 28.02.2024. Respondent Nos.1 to 5 are directed to delete and mask the name of the petitioner from the internet/digital records maintained by them pertaining to the petitioner in respect of NCB-Crime No.48/1/21/2023/BZU on the file of Respondent No.2, forthwith, without any delay.

Implications: The direct effect of the order is that the named respondents must promptly delete and mask the petitioner's name from the specified online/digital records related to the listed NCB case. The opinion itself relies on an earlier judgment and does not articulate any new or expanded legal principle; it disposes of the petition by applying that precedent.