Bengaluru: The High Court has imposed a fine of Rs. 1 lakh on a Woman Police Sub-Inspector (PSI) for securing an interim stay order from the Court on a First Information Report (FIR) by deliberately concealing the crucial fact that the FIR against her had been registered following the Court’s own direction.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna yesterday passed the order while dismissing the petition filed by the PSI T.B. Padmavathi, who had challenged the FIR registered against her on the very direction issued by the High Court itself in April.
Interestingly, the petitioner had “maintained stoic silence” and not even whispered about the orders passed by the High Court in an earlier petition directing the registration of a criminal case against her after reviewing CCTV footage that captured her physically assaulting a woman Advocate inside a Police Station in Bengaluru city.
“The concealment is not peripheral; it is foundational. Had the co-ordinate Bench been apprised that the registration of the FIR was not a routine Police action but one born out of a specific judicial direction issued by the High Court itself after prima facie satisfaction of the petitioner’s overt misconduct, the consideration for grant of interim relief would have stood on an altogether different footing,” the Court observed.
The issue stems from a road rage incident on Feb. 23, 2025, when the Advocate Nabonitha Sen’s car was allegedly damaged by an auto-rickshaw driver.
When Advocate Sen approached the Mico Layout Traffic Police Station to lodge complaint against the autorickshaw driver, the Police allegedly delayed registering her complaint. Out of frustration, Sen behaved erratically dislodging certain papers, following which PSI Padmavathi was called to the Station.
On reaching the station, Padmavathi allegedly kicked the Advocate repeatedly without any provocation and this act was captured on CCTV inside the Station.
Later, the Police also registered a case against Sen for obstructing the Police from discharging their duty.
It was during the hearing of the petition filed by the Advocate Sen, challenging the FIR registered against her, that the Court viewed the CCTV footage, which showed conduct of both, the Advocate and the woman PSI. Following this, the Court, on April 17, ordered registration of FIR against Padmavathi also for her conduct and ordered for a thorough and impartial probe.
The FIR was registered against Padmavathi on May 5 and she filed the petition before the High Court challenging the FIR on May 19 and a Vacation Bench of the High Court, on May 21, stayed the probe as she had not disclosed in her petition that the FIR was registered based on Court’s own direction.
This post was published on July 1, 2026 7:30 pm