Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 455 To 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 463Nominal Index:Siji Malayil & ANR And Union of India & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 455B. SATHYANARAYANACHAR AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 456Raja Yogi Nirmalnathji Maharaj AND KADRI JOGI (YOGISHWAR) MUTT & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 457XXX AND STATE BY WOMEN POLICE STATION & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw...
Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 455 To 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 463
Nominal Index:
Siji Malayil & ANR And Union of India & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 455
B. SATHYANARAYANACHAR AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 456
Raja Yogi Nirmalnathji Maharaj AND KADRI JOGI (YOGISHWAR) MUTT & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 457
XXX AND STATE BY WOMEN POLICE STATION & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 458
The Taj West End Hotel AND K Venkatesh. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 459
J P Nadda AND State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 460
R.K.BHAT AND SHANTHI ROACHE & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 461
Manoj Mittal & ANR AND State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 462
Prema & ANR AND State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 463
Judgments/Orders
Case Title: Siji Malayil & ANR And Union of India & ANR
Case No: WP 19409/2024
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 455
The Karnataka High Court on Monday (November 4) disposed of a public interest litigation petition seeking deployment of Indian Army personnel for rescuing the victims of of the July 16 landslide on National Highway 66 in Uttara Kannada district, after it was informed that the situation was back to normal.
Case Title: B. SATHYANARAYANACHAR AND State of Karnataka & Others
Case No: WRIT PETITION No.21760 OF 2023
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 456
While hearing a plea pertaining to the acquisition of a land claimed to be used as a nursery, the Karnataka High Court has said that the reliance on a 1987 government order exempting Nurseries (Plant nursery) from land acquisition must stop forthwith.
In doing so the high court further said, that if the acquiring authorities want to exempt nurseries from land acquisition, it can do it only after bringing in a regulatory regime for recognition of such nurseries. The high court emphasized that a government order–which in this case exempted nurseries from land acquisition–cannot override a statue.
Case Title: Raja Yogi Nirmalnathji Maharaj AND KADRI JOGI (YOGISHWAR) MUTT & Others
Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 26894 OF 2024
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 457
The Karnataka High Court dismissed a plea moved by the Matadhipathi (religious head) of Kadri Shri Jogi Mutt (Yogishwara Mutt) who had sought appointment of a Commissioner to record his evidence in a suit before the trial court seeking a declaration that the Mutt (monastery) belongs to the Jogi community.
The petitioner defendant–Raja Yogi Nirmalnathji Maharaj had sought this appointment on the ground that he is unable to attend the trial court to lead evidence, as he has to perform daily rituals at the Mutt. He had also contended that his ill-health was not permitting him to attend court. The trial court had rejected his request against which he moved the high court.
Case Title: XXX AND STATE BY WOMEN POLICE STATION & ANR
Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9582 OF 2024
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 458
The Karnataka High Court has said that even if a child in conflict with law is ordered to be tried as an adult, as provided under Section 18(3) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, his bail application is to be considered under Section 12 of the Act, it cannot be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure.
A single judge bench of Justice S Vishwajith Shetty held thus while allowing a bail petition filed by a minor who is accused of sexually assaulting her minor sister and causing her to become pregnant and who is directed to be tried before a Special Court as an adult.
The court said, “Section 12(1) of the Act provides that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, or any other law for the time being in force, a child, who is produced before the Board, shall be released on bail subject to proviso to Section 12(1) of the Act of 2015. Therefore, it is very clear that even if the child is ordered to be tried as an adult, as provided under Section 18(3) of the Act of 2015, for the purpose of his bail application, Section 12 of the Act of 2015 would be applicable and his bail application cannot be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure.”
Case Title: The Taj West End Hotel AND K Venkatesh
Case No: WRIT PETITION No.1474/2020
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 459
The Karnataka High Court has said that the Labour Court cannot on the ground of sympathy alone direct reinstatement of a workman, when he is involved in a serious case of theft.
A single judge bench of Justice K S Hemalekha held thus while allowing a petition filed by The Taj West End Hotel and set aside the order of the tribunal directing reinstatement and payment of back wages to an employee, K Venkatesh.
Case Title: J P Nadda AND State of Karnataka
Case No: WP 22933/2023
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 460
The Karnataka High Court on Thursday (November 7) quashed a criminal case registered against BJP national president J P Nadda relating to certain remarks made at an election rally in April, 2023 for allegedly unduly influencing voters.
A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition and quashed the offence registered under Sections 171F(Punishment for undue influence or personation at an election), 171C (Undue influence at elections) of the IPC and Section 123(2) (Undue influence) of the Representation of the People Act at the Shiggaon police station. On October 12, 2023 the high court had stayed further investigation in the case.
Case Title: R.K.BHAT AND SHANTHI ROACHE & ANR
Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8700 OF 2024
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 461
The Karnataka High Court has said that an application under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code 1973, which provides to bring in another person accused in the case cannot be exercised at a pre-trial stage.
A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed the petition filed by one R K Bhat who is the complainant in the case seeking to implead one Shanthi Roache as a co-accused in a case registered against her husband Norbert D'Souza for offences punishable under provisions of Karnataka Excise Act.
Case Title: Manoj Mittal & ANR AND State of Karnataka
Case No: WP 19489/2024
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 462
The Karnataka High Court on Friday (November 8) quashed the prosecution initiated against two Enforcement Directorate officers who are investigating Valmiki Corporation case and were alleged of coercing a witness to make statements against Chief Minister Siddaramaiah.
A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed a petition filed by Deputy Director and Assistant Director of ED, Manoj Mittal and Murali Kannan, after the complainant in the case Kallesh B filed a memo in the court, stating that he did not want to pursue the complaint further.
Case Title: Prema & ANR AND State of Karnataka
Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 54 OF 2013
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 463
The Karnataka High Court has said that a husband committing suicide allegedly due to his wife having an illicit relationship with another man cannot be a ground to convict the wife for charges of abetment to suicide.
A single-judge bench of Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar allowed the appeal filed by Prema and Basavalinge Gowda and set aside the conviction order passed by the trial court.
Court noted that as per the definition of abutment, there should be instigation to do that thing and then it amounts to abetment. A person is said to have instigated another to an act when he actively suggests or stimulates him to act by means of language, direct or indirect, whether it takes the form of express solicitation, or of hints, insinuation or encouragement.