Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: October 14 To October 20, 2024

Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 436 To 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 443

Nominal Index:

Bangalore Development Authority & Anr and Sachin Nagarajappa and another matter. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 436

Vishal Khatwani AND State of Karnataka.2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 437

Keerthan Kumar & Anr AND State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 438

Veermachaneni Raghavendra Prasad AND Union of India & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 439XXX AND Azim Premji University & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 440

Canara Bank AND Subramanya Rao K & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 441

State of Karnataka & Others AND H S Kanthi. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 442

Saikat Bhatacharyya AND Union of India.2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 443

Judgments/orders

Karnataka HC Upholds Power Of Bangalore Development Authority To Reject Auction Bid Without Giving Reasons Under Commercial Site Rules

Case Title: Bangalore Development Authority & Anr and Sachin Nagarajappa and another matter

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 593 OF 2024 (BDA) C/W WRIT APPEAL NO. 883 OF 2022

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 436

The Karnataka High Court has upheld the power of the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) to accept or reject the bid made by a successful bidder for sites auctioned by it, without assigning any reasons.

A division bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice G Basavaraja said, “The act and conduct of the BDA appears to be bona fide and in the interest of public and also to the benefit of BDA, which in turn, is for the benefit of the general public.”

Karnataka HC Issues Guidelines To Trial Court For Release Of Property Like Mobile Phones, Laptops Seized During Criminal Case Investigation

Case Title: Vishal Khatwani AND State of Karnataka

Case No: CRL.RP No.210/2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 437

The Karnataka High court has issued model guidelines to be followed by the trial courts while dealing with release of the seized properties either under Section 451 and 457 Cr.P.C., or under Section 497 of BNSS, till the State Government issues directions in this regard.

A single judge bench of Justice V Srishananda in its order said, “State Government is required to frame necessary rules which would be in consonance with the power of the Court for disposal of all the seized properties including the electronic devices, digital devices, seized medical samples, food items, adulterated petroleum products which are highly inflammable in nature, perishable objects, precious metals like gold and silver etc.”

Shouting 'Jai Sriram' Inside Mosque Doesn't Outrage Religious Feelings: Karnataka High Court Quashes Case

Case Title: Keerthan Kumar & Anr AND State of Karnataka

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 25591 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 438

Quashing a case against two men accused of an offence under IPC Section 295A for allegedly shouting 'Jai Sriram' in a mosque, the Karnataka High Court said it was not understandable how the slogan would outrage the religious feelings of any class.

This the high court said after noting that the complainant in the case had himself said that Hindus and Muslims were living in harmony in the concerned area. It further said that as no ingredients of the offences alleged were made out, permitting further proceedings against the petitioners would become an abuse of process of law. The two men were booked under various IPC offences including Sections 447(Punishment for criminal trespass), 505(Statements conducing to public mischief), 506(Punishment for criminal intimidation), 34 (common intention) and 295A.

Karnataka High Court Dismisses PIL To Display MRP Of Tractors, Other Agricultural Equipments On Companies' Websites And Govt Portal

Case Title: Veermachaneni Raghavendra Prasad AND Union of India & Others

Case No: WP 25025/2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 439

The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday dismissed a public interest litigation seeking a direction to the Central Government to make it compulsory for all manufacturers of Agricultural equipments and of Tractors, to mention the Maximum Retail Price (MRP) of their products and to display the same in the showroom and website and on the government managed agricultural portal.

A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind dismissed the petition filed by one Veramachaneni Raghavendra Prasad, saying “By the very nature of the subject matter of grievance and prayer made it is evident that the subject matter travels in the realm of executive action for enforcement of rule or law by enacting them by competent law making authority. The court would not like to enter into the area of executive functions.”

Karnataka High Court Asks All Universities, Colleges To Consider Framing 'Mental Health And Anti-Discrimination Policy' For Students

Case Title: XXX AND Azim Premji University & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 14743 OF 2022

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 440

The Karnataka High Court has suggested Universities and Colleges, private or government, to formulate Mental Health Policy and Anti-discrimination policy, so as to prevent and address the serious and deleterious effects these sensitive issues may have on the lives of students.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj appreciated the steps taken by Azim Premji University in formulating and implementing the policies and said, “This action on part of Respondent Nos.1 to 3 would also be required to be emulated by all other Universities and Colleges private or government, so as to prevent and address the serious and deleterious effects these sensitive issues may have on the lives of students, many a time resulting in suicides and other socially abnormal behaviour which impacts not only students, and their immediate family, but also the community as a whole, including the teacher and student community thus requiring to be handled with the care and sensitivity that it deserves.”

[SARFAESI Act] Forfeiture Of Earnest Money Is Statutory Consequence If Auction Purchaser Fails To Deposit Balance Within Time: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Canara Bank AND Subramanya Rao K & ANR

Case No: WA 349/2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 441

The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that when an auction purchaser fails to deposit the balance amount within the statutory period prescribed under the SARFAESI Act, despite having been granted an extension, the forfeiture of his earnest money deposit is a statutory consequence.

A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind held thus while allowing an appeal filed by Canara Bank and set aside the single judge bench's January 12 order by which it had directed the Bank to return the earnest money amount of Rs.3.25 crores to the respondents (original petitioners before the single judge bench).

Administrative Tribunal Cannot Alter Punishment Unless It Records That Dismissal Was Disproportionate To Charges Levelled: Karnataka HC

Case Title: State of Karnataka & Others AND H S Kanthi

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.1647/2020

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 442

The Karnataka High Court has held that unless a finding is recorded that the punishment of dismissal from service imposed on a government employee is disproportionate to the gravity of the charges levelled, the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal will not get jurisdiction to substitute the punishment.

A division bench of Justice S G Pandit and Justice C M Poonacha allowed the petition filed by the State of Karnataka and set aside an order passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, modifying the punishment of dismissal imposed on one H S Kanti, a former Typist to compulsory retirement.

Voluntary/Confessional Statement Made U/S 67 Of NDPS Act Cannot Be Used As Evidence Against Accused: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Saikat Bhatacharyya AND Union of India.

Case no: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 443

The Karnataka High Court recently allowed a petition filed by a 25-year-old and quashed the proceedings initiated against him under provisions of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropics Substances Act (NDPS), after a parcel containing ganja was seized from a courier company having his mobile number on it.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by Saikat Bhatacharyya and quashed the proceedings under section 8(c) r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(A), 23(a), 27, 27A, 28 and 29 of the Act.

The court said “The proceedings against the petitioner cannot be permitted to be continued, as there is not an iota of corroboration that would pin down the petitioner to the offences, except the voluntary/confessional statement of the petitioner recorded under Section 67 of the Act, which is clearly hit by Section 25 of the Evidence Act.”

Resolution Professional At S.94/95 Stage Cannot Decide On Maintainability Of Petition By Entering Into Merits: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Buoyant Technology Constellations Pvt. Ltd. vs. Manyata Realty & Ors.

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO.498 OF 2024 (GM-RES)

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 443

The Karnataka High Court Bench of Justice N.V. Anjaria and K.V. Aravind, held that the role of the Registrar while registering the application under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) is not adjudicatory in nature and this duty of the Registrar, NCLT was in no way adjudicatory trapping. Application of judicial mind towards merits has no place in discharge of a ministerial or clerical function.