Karnataka High Court Monthly Digest: May 2022 [Citations No: 145-179]

MOHAMED ARIF JAMEEL v. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 145

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., LTD., v. NAGENDRA, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 146

Stanley Joseph v. State, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 147

Sathish N v. Ambika J, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 148

Chennaiah @Doddachennaiah and others v. Bylappa and others Case, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 149

B S PRAKASH v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS., and connected matters, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 150

Babu A Dhammanagi vs Union Of India, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 151

Xiaomi Technology India Private Limited v. Union of India, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 152

The Management Of Ksrtc v. K.Shivaram, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 153

Banu Begum W/O Khajasab Alias Mehaboobsab and Others v. State of Karnataka, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 154

Savithri v. State of Karnataka, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 155

Pooja S v. Abhishek Shetty, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 156

Praveen Kumar Adyapady and Anr. v. State of Karnataka, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 157

Indian Council For Cultural Relations & Others v. Ajay Merchant & Anr, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 158

Rashmi Tandon & Anr v. The State Of Karnataka, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 159

Ashwini v. State of Karnataka, 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 160

Prashanth Sambargi v. The State of Karnataka And Anr, 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 161

Injamam Shariff v. State of Karnataka, 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 162

Good Shepherd Convent v. State of Karnataka And Others, 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 163

Chief Executive Officer and Anr v. K.V.Puttaraju, 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 164

Sushil Goel And Anr v. State At The Instance Of Drug Inspector, 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 165

M/s. Manipal Technologies Ltd. Versus State of Karnataka, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 166

SHIVAPRASAD @ SHIVA v. State of Karnataka, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 167

N.R. Sugandaraju v. State of Karnataka, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 168

NETHRA v STATE OF KARNATAKA, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 169

V Srinivasaraju v State by Yelahanka Police, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 170

E S Praveen Kumar v. State of Karnataka, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 171

Shalini and Anr. versus National Highways Authority of India and Ors. Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 172

CANCER PATIENTS AID ASSOCIATION v CENTRAL BOARD OF FILM CERTIFICATION, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 173

SUJIT S/O MADIWALAPPA MULGUND v. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 174

Sangeeta Gadagin v. State Of Karnataka, & C/W Matters, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 175

2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 176

Prakash Sharma S/O Mehdi Sharma v. State By Marathahalli , 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 177

SATHISH K and others v State of Karnataka, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 178

The Bangalore Development Authority and Others v. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 179

Judgments/Orders/Reports

1. Karnataka High Court Dismisses Challenge To Law Validating Recruitment Of 362 KPSC Gazetted Probationers Of 2011 Batch

Case Title: MOHAMED ARIF JAMEEL v. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.6795 OF 2022 (S-RES-PIL)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 145

The Karnataka High Court recently dismissed a petition filed seeking to declare the Karnataka Civil Services (Validation of Selection and Appointment of 2011 Batch Gazetted Probationers) Act 2022 as unconstitutional, illegal and void. Through the said Act, the government has validated the recruitment of 362 gazetted 'probationers' of the 2011 batch, selected by the Karnataka Public Service Commission.

2. Incapacity To Work Has To Be Determined With Reference To Sole Occupation Of Person As On Date Of Motor Accident: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., LTD., versus NAGENDRA Case No: MFA NO.8801 OF 2018,

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 146

The Karnataka High Court has said that a person who is a driver by profession if loses complete vision of one eye in a motor accident, then he would not be able to continue his profession of driving, thus it would have to be considered as permanent physical disability and 100% loss of earning capacity.

3. Going Back On Promise To Marry Not Cheating But Failure To Repay Loan Will Attract S.420 IPC: Karnataka High Court On Film Director's Plea

Case Title: Stanley Joseph v. State Case No: Criminal Petition no 1172/2018

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 147

In a cheating case instituted by a woman against film director Stanley Joseph, the Karnataka High Court has said that though going back on a promise to marry will not amount to cheating in this case, but obtaining a loan and not repaying the same will amount to criminal intention to cheating, attracting Section 420 of IPC.

4. Wife Leaving Matrimonial House Not Ground To Deny Maintenance If She Moved Out Due To Ill-Treatment By Husband: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Sathish N v. Ambika J Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No. 474 OF 2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 148

The Karnataka High Court recently observed that if a wife moves out of the matrimonial house due to ill-treatment meted out by husband, he cannot claim that she moved out by mutual consent and thus he is not liable to pay maintenance amount.

5. Suit For Injunction In Respect Of Immovable Property Not Abated On Death Of Parties: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Chennaiah @Doddachennaiah and others versus Bylappa and others Case No: RSA No 743/2011

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 149

The Karnataka High Court has said that in a suit relating to grant of injunction in respect of an immovable property, the right to sue is not personal to the plaintiff but survives to his legal representative and the suit for injunction would not therefore abate on the death of the parties.

6. Karnataka High Court Issues Guidelines For Making Or Continuing Entries In Rowdy Register /History Sheets In Light Of 'Privacy Jurisprudence'

Case title: B S PRAKASH versus THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS., and connected matters, Case No: W.P.NO.4504/2021

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 150

The Karnataka High Court recently issued guidelines to be followed by the police before entering the name of an individual to the Register of Rowdies, which is maintained by every police station.

7. Adjudicating Authority Is Not Bound By The Recommendation Of The Resolution Professional Under Section 99 Of The Insolvency And Bankruptcy Code, 2016 : Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Babu A Dhammanagi vs Union Of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 151

A division bench of the Karnataka High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of Sections 95, 99 and 100 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("the Code") as it found no merit to the challenge.

The Court held that the process contemplated under Sections 95 to 100 is a time bound process, which requires the Resolution Professional to firstly give reasons in support of his recommendation. Secondly, the role of the Resolution Professional is limited to giving his recommendation and there is no element of adjudication on the part of the Resolution Professional. It is Adjudicating Authority which takes the final decision on whether the application is to be admitted or rejected, and it is not bound by the recommendation of the Resolution Professional.

8: Karnataka High Court Stays ED Order Seizing Xioami India Assets

Case title: Xiaomi Technology India Private Limited v. Union of India Case No: WP 9182/2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 152

The Karnataka High Court on Thursday stayed the order issued by the Enforcement Directorate dated April 29, by which it has seized Rs.5551.27 Crore of M/s Xiaomi Technology India Private Limited under the provisions of Foreign Exchange Management Act,1999.

9. Labour Court Has No Jurisdiction To Adjudicate Workman's Claim U/S 33C(2) ID Act In An Undetermined Claim: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: The Management Of KSRTC v. K.Shivaram Case No: Writ Petition No.17583/2017 (L-KSRTC)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 153

The Karnataka High Court has said that a workman who claims compensation due to injuries suffered during the course of employment, his claims under the Employees Compensation Act 1923, would lie before the Employees Compensation Commissioner and not before the Labour Court.

10. Adopting Child Directly From Biological Parents Not An Offence U/S 80 Juvenile Justice Act: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: BANU BEGUM W/O KHAJASAB ALIAS MEHABOOBSAB and Others Versus State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100659 OF 2021

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 154

The Karnataka High Court has said that in the absence of a declaration that a child is deserted by his biological or adoptive parents or guardians, filing of chargesheet under section 80 of the Juvenile Justice (Care And Protection Of Children) Act 2015, is without any substance.

11. Karnataka HC Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against 68-Year-Old Woman Charged Under SC/ST Act

Case Title: Savithri v. State of Karnataka Case No: Criminal Petition 8857/2018

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 155

Observing that, "She had no criminal intention in the initial stage while obtaining the (caste) certificate and seeking reservation and got (job) appointment, but she bonafidely believed that she will get the caste of her husband in view of marrying the person who belongs to member of SC/ST," the Karnataka High Court recently quashed the criminal proceedings pending against a 68-year-old woman (Brahmin by birth), who was charged under provisions of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

12. Husband Initiates Marriage Dissolution Proceedings, Karnataka High Court Asks Him To Pay Wife Rs 25K As Litigation Expenses

Case Title: POOJA S v. ABHISHEK SHETTY Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.24220 OF 2021

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 156

The Karnataka High Court recently directed a husband to pay Rs 25,000 as litigation expenses to allow the wife to engage an advocate and to contest the proceedings filed by him seeking dissolution of marriage.

13. S.13 Notaries Act | Can't Take Cognizance Of Offences Committed By Advocate, Notary Unless Sanctioned By Centre/State: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Praveen Kumar Adyapady and ANR v. State of Karnataka Case No: Criminal Petition 888/2018

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 157

The Karnataka High Court has ruled that as per Section 13 of the Notaries Act, there is a bar for taking cognizance by the Court for offences committed by an advocate and notary while adding that under the Act, the police have to obtain the permission of the Central Government or State Government for filing the charge sheet and taking cognizance.

14. ICCR Can Investigate & Take Disciplinary Action Against British Council Library Employees On Complaint Of Misconduct: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: INDIAN COUNCIL FOR CULTURAL RELATIONS & others v. AJAY MERCHANT & Anr Case No: W.P. No.32335 OF 2017

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 158

The Karnataka High Court has said that a person appointed by the Indian Council for Cultural Relations (ICCR) and placed with the British Council Library, is an employee of the British Council Library and it can investigate and take disciplinary action against the employee on complaint of misconduct.

15. Invoking S.138 Of NI Act Does Not Bar Registration Of Crime Under Sections 406, 420 IPC: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: RASHMI TANDON & ANR v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.6638 OF 2021

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 159

The Karnataka High Court has held that proceedings under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code are maintainable even if a complaint has been invoked Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

16: Police Can't Refuse To Conduct Investigation After Magistrate Has Accepted Complaint U/S 200 CrPC: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Ashwini v. State of Karnataka Case No: WRIT PETITION No.755 OF 2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 160

The Karnataka High Court has said that once the court accepts the complaint filed under section 200 of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) and directs particular police to investigate, the police cannot decline to investigate.

17. Defamation | Magistrate Can't Refer Complaint About Offence U/S 500 IPC To Police For Investigation U/S 156(3) CrPC: Karnataka High Court

Case title: PRASHANTH SAMBARGI v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA and ANR. Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.349 OF 2021

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 161

The Karnataka High Court recently quashed the proceedings initiated under section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), wherein the Magistrate court referred the complaint filed for defamation under section 499, 500 of the Indian Penal Code to the police for further investigation.

18: Denying Bail For Offence Yet To Be Investigated Merely Because Accused Is Habitual Offender Is "Unjust": Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Injamam Shariff v. State of Karnataka Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.4045/2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 162

The Karnataka High Court has observed that merely because a person is alleged to be habitual offenders or have criminal antecedents, keeping them in jail for an offence which is yet to be investigated is 'unjust'.

19. Can't Levy Betterment Charges Under Town Planning Act For Mere 'Alterations' To Existing Building: Karnataka HC Grants Relief To 150-Yrs Old School

Case Title: GOOD SHEPHERD CONVENT v STATE OF KARNATAKA and Others Case No: WRIT PETITION No.47882 OF 2014 (LB-BMP)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 163

The Karnataka High Court has recently quashed the order passed by Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) demanding payment of betterment charges/ fee from an over 150 year-old school which proposes to construct additional floors on the existing school campus by way of an extension.

20. Employees Eligible For Gratuity For Period Before Their Employment Is Regularised: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Chief Executive Officer and Anr v. K.V.Puttaraju Case No: W.P.No.46017/2017

Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 164

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash an order passed by the Controlling Authority/ Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, which directed government bodies to pay gratuity amount claimed by former employees from the time they were employed as daily wage earners till their employment was regularised.

21. Directors Of Manufacturing Company Can't Be Prosecuted For Sub-Standard Drugs Unless They Played An "Active Role" In The Process: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Sushil Goel And Anr v. State At The Instance Of Drug Inspector Case no: CRIMINAL PETITION No.6875 OF 2020

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 165

The Karnataka High Court recently quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against the Proprietors/ Directors of a drugs manufacturing company for alleged production of sub-standard quality drugs, while observing that they did not play an "active role" in the alleged offence.

22. 18% GST Payable On 'Pattadar Pass Book Cum Title Deed' ; Karnataka High Court Upholds AAR Ruling

Case Title: M/s. Manipal Technologies Ltd. Versus State of Karnataka Case No: WP No. 4866/2021

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 166

The Karnataka High Court bench of Justice S. Sujatha and Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar, while upholding the ruling of the Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR), held that 18% GST is payable on 'pattadar pass book cum title deed'.

23. Karnataka High Court Acquits Murder Convict, Sets Aside Life Term After Man Serves 13 Yrs In Jail

Case Title: SHIVAPRASAD @ SHIVA v. State of Karnataka  Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL No.573/2019

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 167

The Karnataka High Court recently set aside the conviction of a man, incarcerated since 13 years, for the offence of murder under Section 302 IPC. The Court thus set aside the life term imposed by Special CBI Court and ordered his forthwith release.

24. Karnataka High Court Grants Bail To PT Teacher Charged Under POCSO Act For Misbehaving With Student

Case Title: N.R. Sugandaraju v. State of Karnataka, Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2917/2022.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 168

The Karnataka High Court recently granted bail to a PT Teacher accused of misbehaving with a student studying in the 10th standard of the school and charged under section 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

25. S.437 CrPC | Woman Can Be Granted Bail For Non-Bailable Offence Even If It Is Punishable With Life Sentence/ Death: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: NETHRA v STATE OF KARNATAKA   Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.2306 OF 2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 169

Observing that it is not the law that bail should always be denied in a case where the offence punishable is of death or life imprisonment, the Karnataka High Court recently granted bail to a woman accused of murdering her husband. A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by one Netra and granted her bail relying on section 437 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).

26. [Abetment Of Suicide] Perception Of Words Differs From Person To Person, Can't Quash FIR Without Trial: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: V Srinivasaraju v State by Yelahanka Police. Case No: Criminal Petition no 4770/2015.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 170

The Karnataka High Court while refusing to quash the case of abetment of suicide against an accused, has observed that perception of threatening word differs from person to person and thus, it would not be appropriate in the facts of the case to quash the FIR without a full-fledged trial.

27. Police Sub-Inspector Is Empowered To Investigate & File Charge Sheet: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: E S Praveen Kumar v. State of Karnataka, Case No: Criminal Petition 2807/2022.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 171

The Karnataka High Court has held that a Police Sub-Inspector is empowered to investigate and file charge sheet. There is no defect in the charge sheet filed by the Police Sub-Inspector after due investigation.

28. No Stamp Duty Leviable On Award Of Compensation Passed By An Arbitrator Under Section 3G(5) Of The National Highways Act: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Shalini and Anr. versus National Highways Authority of India and Ors.

Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 172

The Karnataka High Court has ruled that an award of compensation passed by an Arbitrator under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 does not attract stamp duty.

29. Karnataka High Court Dismisses Plea Seeking Action Against KGF-2 Movie For Alleged Promotion Of Smoking

Case Title: CANCER PATIENTS AID ASSOCIATION v CENTRAL BOARD OF FILM CERTIFICATION

Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 173

Case no: WP 5861/2022

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday dismissed a petition filed by Cancer Patients Aid Association against the movie "KGF-2" for allegedly promoting smoking by displaying the habit as healthy and heroic.

30. Speedy Investigation : Karnataka High Court Sets Time Limit For Probe; 60 Days For Petty Offences, 90 Day For Heinous Crimes

Case Title: SUJIT S/O MADIWALAPPA MULGUND v. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

Case No: WP 15144/2021

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 174

The Karnataka High Court has issued general directions for speedy conclusion of investigations in criminal matters. A single judge bench of Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav in its interim order said, "There is a requirement to pass directions for speedy conclusion of investigation, that may be applicable to the matters in general."

31. Right To Nutritious Food Under Article 21: Karnataka High Court Directs State Govt To Forthwith Implement ICDS Scheme

Case Title: Sangeeta Gadagin v. State Of Karnataka, & C/W Matters.    Case No: WP 3522/2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 175

The Karnataka High Court has directed the State Government to forthwith take necessary steps to implement the Integrated Child Development Services Scheme (ICDS Scheme) in the state. Otherwise, the Court observed that the fundamental right to nutritious food of 50 lakhs beneficiaries in Karnataka, particularly of pregnant women, lactating mothers and children, stand violated.

32. Karnataka HC Directs Police To Investigate Allegations Of Unnatural Sex Leveled Against IIT'ian Husband By Wife Also Pursuing Doctorate At IIT

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 176

The Karnataka High Court has directed the police to investigate alleged charges of performing unnatural sex, levelled against a husband by his estranged wife.

33. 'No Specific Allegation': Karnataka High Court Grants Bail To Receptionist Of Hotel Being Used As Brothel

Case Title: Prakash Sharma S/O Mehdi Sharma v. State By Marathahalli Police Station     Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4281 OF 2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 177

The Karnataka High Court has granted bail to an accused who was working as a receptionist at a hotel which was allegedly being used as a brothel.

34. Criminal Proceedings For Offence Of Rape Can Be Closed On Account Of Settlement Between Parties: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: SATHISH K and others v State of Karnataka   Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.4172 OF 2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 178

The Karnataka High Court recently held that closure of proceedings on account of settlement arrived at between the parties even for offence of Rape, punishable under Section 376 of the IPC, is permissible. Observing thus, it quashed the proceedings pending against four persons on the complaint made by a woman belonging to the same family.

35. Res Judicata: Son Bound By Judicial Proceedings Initiated By Father With Respect To Immovable Property, Rules Karnataka High Court

Case Title: The Bangalore Development Authority and Others v. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department and others

Case No: WA 4121/2017

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 179

The Karnataka High Court has said that proceedings initiated by a father in respect of a claim of title over a property which is decided by the court will bind the son also. He cannot be permitted to agitate for the same cause, following the principle of res-judicata.