Citation 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 490 to 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 500Nominal Index: Union of India & Others AND Government of Karnataka & Others. 2024LiveLaw (Kar) 490DODDABALLAPUR SPINNING MILLS AND THE BANKING OMBUDSMAN & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 491Sourish Bose & ANR AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 492Naleen Kumar Kateel v State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw...
Citation 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 490 to 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 500
Nominal Index:
Union of India & Others AND Government of Karnataka & Others. 2024LiveLaw (Kar) 490
DODDABALLAPUR SPINNING MILLS AND THE BANKING OMBUDSMAN & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 491
Sourish Bose & ANR AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 492
Naleen Kumar Kateel v State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 493
State of Karnataka & ANR AND Dr Madhu Kumar M H. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 494
Chandra AND Chief Superintendent & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 495
KANAKA LAKSHMI B M AND State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 496
M V Srinivas Gowda AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 497
Vinay Kulkarni And Central Bureau of Investigation & Others and batch. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 498
Sudha Bai & Others AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 499
Akhil Thomas AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 500
Judgments/Orders
Case Title: Union of India & Others AND Government of Karnataka & Others
Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 26954 OF 2024
Citation No: 2024LiveLaw (Kar) 490
The Karnataka High Court has set aside an order of the National Green Tribunal (Southern Zone) directing Madras Engineering Group, a training Unit of the Indian Army, to pay an environmental compensation of Rs Rs.2,94,63,000 for polluting Ulsoor Lake in Bengaluru.
A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind said “This Court is inclined to exercise powers under Article 226 of the Constitution in limited context and in respect of specific area which is non compliance of principles of natural justice, in as much as the order against the petitioners came to be passed by the NGT imposing the liability of payment of environment compensation without affording hearing to the petitioners.”
Case Title: DODDABALLAPUR SPINNING MILLS AND THE BANKING OMBUDSMAN & Others
Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 41048 OF 2019
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 491
The Karnataka High Court has directed the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to issue necessary guidelines to be followed by Banks in cases where a demand draft is not presented for clearance during its validity period and whether in such cases the amount covered can be automatically credited to the account of the customer on expiry.
A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj said, “Reserve Bank of India to issue necessary guidelines as regards the status of a demand draft not presented for clearance during its validity and amongst other things, if the amount covered under the demand draft can be automatically credited to the account of the customer on expiry if the demand draft has purchased the same through her bank account.”
Case Title: Sourish Bose & ANR AND State of Karnataka & ANR
Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No. 10546 OF 2024
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 492
Dismissing a plea filed by two persons seeking quashing of an FIR registered against them for allegedly defrauding Amazon Seller Services Limited to the tune of Rs 69,91,940, the Karnataka High Court said that the facts in the case are "so seriously disputed" that they are like a "maze" and would require a full blown trial.
Dismissing the petition filed by Sourish Bose and Deepanvita Ghosh Justice M Nagaprasanna in his order said, “The Apex Court holds that, when the case is shrouded with seriously disputed questions of fact, the High Court should not interfere.The questions of fact are so seriously disputed in the case at hand; they are maze and it would amaze this Court to interfere on such facts”.
Case title: Naleen Kumar Kateel v State of Karnataka
Case No: Criminal Petition No: 10321 of 2024.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 493
The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday (December 3) quashed proceedings pertaining to an FIR registered against former BJP State president Naleen Kumar Kateel for allegedly extorting money under the guise of electoral bonds
The high court in its order said that the complainant in the case was alien to the alleged transaction and an alien cannot complain of extortion. It further said in its order that the complaint suffers from want of locus to register the complaint. The court further observed in its order that "not even a modicum" of ingredients of the alleged offence have made out even in its "prima facie sense", and what the complainant had projected is a "huge hocus-pocus", but he in fact has "no locus".
Case Title: State of Karnataka & ANR AND Dr Madhu Kumar M H
Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 31104 OF 2024
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 494
The Karnataka High Court has upheld the order of the State Administrative Tribunal which directed the State government to consider representation of Dr Madhu Kumar M H, Specialist (Physician), KR Hospital in Mysuru for permission to go on deputation for higher studies.
A division bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice C M Joshi said, “The petitioners are not justified in keeping employee's claim for educational deputation, especially when admission to courses of the kind are time bound and liable to lapse if not availed. Expeditious decision therefore is eminently warranted in matters of the kind. No such expeditiousness nor seriousness warranted in the matter having been shown, the Tribunal is more than justified in granting relief to the respondent – employee.”
Case Title: Chandra AND Chief Superintendent & Others
Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 29234 OF 2024
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 495
The Karnataka High Court has granted 90-day parole leave to a murder convict to oversee the agricultural activities of the land, which is standing in the name of his father.
Justice Hemant Chandangoudar allowed the petition filed by one Chandra who has been in judicial custody for over 11 years and undergoing sentence of life imprisonment for offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC.
Case Title: KANAKA LAKSHMI B M AND State of Karnataka
Case No: Criminal Petition No 12695 of 2024.
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 496
The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday (December 4) rejected a plea for transfer of investigation to CBI in an abetment to suicide case–concerning the death of an advocate–registered against a Deputy Superintendent of Police.
It however constituted an SIT to investigate into the alleged crime, to be headed by IPS Vinay Verma, Superintendent of police, CBI, ACB Bengaluru and the SIT is to complete the investigation within three months.
Justice M Nagaprasanna while dictating his order said, "Application of the Association to refer matter to CBI stands rejected. However, i deem it appropriate to constitute a SIT to investigate into the crime".
Case Title: M V Srinivas Gowda AND State of Karnataka & Others
Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.27154 OF 2019
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 497
The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by M V Srinivasa Gowda, challenging an order passed by Deputy Commissioner, Kolar District, directing initiation of proceedings against him to recover the entire amount paid as honorarium to him under the Karnataka State Freedom Fighters Welfare Rules, 1969.
In doing so the court underscored that the object of the scheme is to provide pension to the genuine freedom fighters who deserve to be treated with reverence, and if applications without proof are entertained the "scheme would be converted into a bounty".
A division bench of Justice S G Pandit and Justice Ramachandra D Huddar said “All care has to be taken to see that real freedom fighters do not suffer and their claims are accepted, but, at the same time, fictitious claims have to be sternly dealt with on merits.”
Case Title: Vinay Kulkarni And Central Bureau of Investigation & Others and batch
Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.12176 OF 2024 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION No.12188 OF 2024 CRIMINAL PETITION No.12479 OF 2024 CRIMINAL PETITION No.12492 OF 2024.
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 498
The Karnataka High Court quashed an order of a special court which had directed a magisterial court to record an accused's statement under Section 164 CrPC in a murder case, pursuant to which he was granted pardon and made an approver, noting that such an order was on the face of it illegal and against the law.
Justice M Nagaprasanna held thus while allowing a petition filed by Congress leader Vinay Kulkarni and others challenging an order passed by the Special Court granting pardon to accused no 1 in the case, Basavaraj Shivappa Muttagi. The accused are charged in the Dharwad Zilla Panchayat member Yogesh Goudar murder case of 2016. The challenge considered by the high court was that the special court's order had now transposed accused No.1 as a witness by and had granted him the status of an approver under Section 306 (Tender of pardon to accomplice) of the Cr.P.C.
Case Title: Sudha Bai & Others AND State of Karnataka & ANR
Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7090 OF 2023
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 499
The Karnataka High Court has quashed a criminal case registered by a woman against her brother-in-law and others alleging them of causing mental harassment to her when they after she had a feud with her husband called her to the matrimonial home for conciliation.
Single judge Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by Sudha Bai and others and quashed the proceedings initiated against them under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Case Title: Akhil Thomas AND State of Karnataka & ANR
Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5952 OF 2024
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 500
Observing that “there cannot be promise of marriage held on to a lady, who was already married,” the Karnataka High Court quashed a rape case registered against a man by a woman whom he met on 'bumble app' where the woman had in her profile projected herself to be a divorced lady.
Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by Akhil Thomas and quashed the proceedings initiated against him under Sections 376, 420 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
The petitioner had contended that acts from the date they met till the date of registration of the crime were all consensual, but never on a promise of marriage. The complainant was already married and had projected herself to be a divorced lady in the Bumble app, therefore, when the petitioner came to know the fact that she was not yet divorced, had breached the said promise.