Nominal IndexGopala Sadashiva Gayatri & others And State By Girinagara Police & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 258Lalitha Siddi And State Of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 259Karnataka Growers Federation And Government of India. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 260Rajesh K S N And State By Karnataka Through Mangalore Women Police Station. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 261V Jagdish Bhatija & ANR And State...
Nominal Index
Gopala Sadashiva Gayatri & others And State By Girinagara Police & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 258
Lalitha Siddi And State Of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 259
Karnataka Growers Federation And Government of India. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 260
Rajesh K S N And State By Karnataka Through Mangalore Women Police Station. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 261
V Jagdish Bhatija & ANR And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 262
Dr Shyamala Bai & Others And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 263
Harish Kumar A And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 264
Gopal & ANR And The Deputy Commissioner & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 265
Miss Jirewad Kalyani Sunil AND State of Karnataka & Others. Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 266
Judgments/Orders
Case Title: Gopala Sadashiva Gayatri & others And State By Girinagara Police & ANR
Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4835 OF 2021
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 258
The Karnataka High Court recently dismissed a petition filed by five persons seeking to quash proceedings initiated against them for allegedly demanding money from the Chief Administrator Officer of Ramachandrapura Mutt for withdrawing a PIL filed by Gokarna Hitha Rakshana Samithi against the Mutt, alleging financial irregularities.
A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan said, “Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the offence committed by the accused cannot be taken in a lighter way as they have filed PIL case and demanded Rs.5 crores for withdrawing the said case and were caught red handed while accepting Rs.10 lakh. The Police have thoroughly investigated the matter and filed the charge sheet. Therefore, there is a prima facie material for framing of charges against the accused persons. Therefore, the proceedings cannot be quashed.”
Case Title: Lalitha Siddi And State Of Karnataka & ANR
Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100269 OF 2022
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 259
In the context of PCOSO trials, the Karnataka High Court has held that only the special court has power to quantify the compensation to the child victims under NALSA scheme and that DLSA is under legal obligation to give effect to the compensation determined by the special Court.
It added that while determining compensation, the trial court has to consider the evidence on record, nature of injury suffered by the victim, the circumstance under which the offence has been committed, the need of victim child for rehabilitation, medical treatment, education of the victim, etc.
A single judge bench of Justice Anil K Batti sitting at Dharwad observed, "It is obligatory on the part of Special Court Judges under POCSO Act to determine appropriate compensation to which victim child is entitled in the light of NALSA's scheme and Rule 9 of [POCSO] Rules 2020 till the framing of a compensation scheme specifically for a child victims in POCSO cases. The role of DLSA is to enforce the compensation determined by the Special Court and to make payment to victim child in terms of Rule 10 of Rules 2020 in compliance with the circular issued by this court as referred above."
Case Title: Karnataka Growers Federation And Government of India
Case No: WP 24307/2022
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 260
The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday suggested that 24*7 control rooms set up by State government for receipt of information about man-animal conflicts in areas surrounding forests be connected with Civil hospitals and Primary Healthcare Centres for immediate attention to those injured.
It said “We direct the State government to extend the access of control room to the nearest Primary Health Centre (PHC) and the District Civil Hospital, through the Resident Medical Officer of PHC and Civil Surgeon attached to Civil hospital, so that in case an information in respect of some seriously injured person is shared with the control room, it can forward it to nearest PHC and or the District Civil hospital and on receipt of such information necessary medical assistance or first aid can be provided to injured."
Case Title: Rajesh K S N And State By Karnataka Through Mangalore Women Police Station.
Case No: Criminal Petition no.10550 of 2022
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 261
The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash a rape complaint registered against a Magaluru based advocate by a law student working as an intern in his office.
A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna observed, "If a naive student of law, enters the office of an Advocate, as an intern; in turn gets to face these horrendous acts, it would have a chilling effect on the entire practice and profession. Therefore, it is for the accused to come out clean in a full blown trial."
Consumer Forum Member's 'Caste Hurl' Complaint Against Landlords Quashed By Karnataka High Court
Case Title: V Jagdish Bhatija & ANR And State of Karnataka
Case No: CRL.P 4384/2023
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 262
The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday quashed the proceedings initiated under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act by a "disgruntled tenant" who happens to be a member of the District Consumer Forum, against her landlords.
A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna found the narration in her complaint quite strange and said permitting further investigation against the petitioners would amount to abuse of process of law.
Karnataka High Court Quashes Medical Negligence Complaint In Absence Of Expert Opinion
Case Title: Dr Shyamala Bai & Others And State of Karnataka & ANR
Case NO: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2264 OF 2017
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 263
The Karnataka High Court recently quashed a medical negligence case registered against three doctors as the police failed to support the charge by obtaining an expert's opinion.
A single judge bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum allowed the quashing petition observing, “If the Medical Council of India (MCI) while entertaining the appeal has concluded that there is no medical negligence, I am of the view that the proceedings are liable to be quashed.”
Case Title: Harish Kumar A And State of Karnataka & ANR
Case No: Criminal Appeal no. 1167 of 2023
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 264
The Karnataka High Court has set aside an order of conviction handed down to an accused found guilty of outraging the modesty of a woman as the accused could not cross examined the prosecution witnesses.
A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan remanded the matter back to the Trial Court for fresh consideration, observing, “Of course, speedy trial is mandatory, however, denial of providing an opportunity to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses, which is nothing but denial of fair trial under Guaranteed Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”
Case Title: Gopal & ANR And The Deputy Commissioner & Others
Case No: Writ Petition no. 13182 of 2022
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 265
The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by the sons of an aged woman against an order of the Deputy Commissioner that directed them to pay her maintenance amount of Rs 10,000, under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act.
A Single judge bench of Justice Krishan S Dixit dismissed the petition filed by Gopal and others who questioned the order directing them to pay Rs 10,000 to their 84-year-old mother who is residing with their sister. “If an able bodied person is bound to maintain his dependent wife, there is no reason why such a rule should not apply when it comes to the case of a dependent mother. An argument to the contra falls foul of law & religion, to which the Petitioners belong.”
Case Title: Miss Jirewad Kalyani Sunil AND State of Karnataka & Others
Case No: Writ Petition No 13658 OF 2023, C/W Writ Petition No. 11214 OF 2023
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 266
The Karnataka High Court has directed the Mangalore-based Karnataka Ayurveda Medical College to surrender one management seat to the government during the next academic year i.e., 2024-25, for admitting a student beyond the cut off date.
Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum also imposed a cost of Rs 5 lakh on the college to be deposited with the Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences and directed the College to submit an undertaking to the University stating that it will not repeat such a mistake of admitting the students beyond the cut-off date.