A weekly round-up of important legal developments in Karnataka.1: No Vicarious Liability ForCriminal Offences In Absence Of Statute: Karnataka HC Quashes Defamation CaseAgainst MP Rajeev Chandrashekhar Case Title: Rajeev Chandrasekhar v. K.Koteswar Rao Case No: Criminal Petition No.101127 Of 2015 Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 51 The Karnataka High Court has quashed the...
A weekly round-up of important legal developments in Karnataka.
Case Title: Rajeev Chandrasekhar v. K.Koteswar Rao Case No: Criminal Petition No.101127 Of 2015
Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 51
The Karnataka High Court has quashed the defamation proceedings against Member of Parliament, Rajeev Chandrashekhar, initiated in the year 2012, when he was the Managing Director of Suvarna News 24/7 Kannada Television Channel. A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna while allowing the quashing petition filed by Chandrashekhar said "The principle of vicarious liability is not applicable to criminal offences in the absence of any provision laid down in the statute. The Managing Director thus cannot be held to be vicariously liable for the acts committed by the Company or its employees merely because he happens to be the Managing Director of the TV news channel."
Case Title: Hemalatha v. Venkatesh Case No: Writ Petition No.39982 Of 2018
Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 52
The Karnataka High Court has held that the properties which had been given as dowry or otherwise at the time of marriage of the daughter, would be amenable for partition and the same will have to be included in a suit for partition, instituted by the daughter.
A single-judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj said, "In a suit for partition, the properties which had been given as dowry or otherwise at the time of marriage of the daughter plaintiff, claiming a right of partition under Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, would be amenable for partition and the same would have to be included in a suit for partition."
Hijab Ban Reports
A Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court today continued hearing Advocate General Prabhuling Navadgi on behalf of the State, in the petitions filed by Muslim girl students, who have challenged the action of a government college in denying their entry for wearing a hijab (headscarf). Today is the 7th day of the hearing before the Full Bench. When the hearing started, the bench led by the Chief Justice sought a clarification from the State regarding its stand on banning hijab. This arose in view of the AG's submission that the Government Order dated February 5, which has been challenged in the writ petitions, does not prescribe any ban on hijab and that it is only an "innocuous" order which asks students to follow the uniforms prescribed by their institutions.
The Advocate General of Karnataka on Monday assured the Karnataka High Court that there will be no violation by any government department of the February 10 order of the High Court, which had restrained students from wearing religious dresses in classrooms in institutions with prescribed uniforms. The AG's assurance came in response to a complaint that hijab ban was being enforced by authorities even in colleges without any dress code and policemen are deployed at the college gates to harass hijab-wearing Muslim women, including teachers.
The Karnataka High Court on Monday refused to grant any interim relief to two degree college students of Bhandarkar College of Arts and Science, Udupi, who sought directions to the college to permit them to attend classes wearing their headscarf(hijab). A single judge bench of Justice Krishan S Dixit refused interim relief while hearing a petition filed by two students of the Bhandarkar College of Arts and Science, Udupi. The bench observed that the interim order passed by the Full Bench on February 10 governs the issue at present and hence no other relief can be granted by a single bench, especially when hearing was progressing before the Full Bench.
A Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court today continued hearing Advocate General Prabhuling Navadgi on behalf of the State, in the petitions filed by Muslim girl students, who have challenged the action of a government college in denying their entry for wearing a hijab (headscarf). Today is the 8th day of the hearing before the Full Bench. Navadgi told the Bench comprising Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice JM Khazi that petitioners have not shown that wearing hijab is an essential religious practice in Islam and thus, the protection under Article 25 of the Constitution is not available to them.
Advocate General Prabhuling K Navadgi on Tuesday made a statement before the Karnataka High Court that the government order dated February 5, directing that all the government schools should wear compulsorily the uniforms prescribed by the government and private schools managements should prescribe uniforms in their schools and Pre University Colleges are concerned should wear uniform prescribed by the College Development Committee, is not applicable to Minority Unaided Educational Institutions.
6: Stop Media From ChasingHijab-Wearing Students & Teachers : PIL In Karnataka High Court
Case Title: Abdul Mansoor v. State of Karnataka Case No: WP 3942/2022
A Public Interest Litigation has been filed in the Karnataka High Court seeking to restrain media houses from chasing the students and teachers who are proceeding to their schools & colleges wearing hijab/burqas and from videographing and photographing of children and teachers near to their schools while they were removing their hijabs and burqas Advocate S Balakrishnan appearing for the petitioners Abdul Mansoor and others on Tuesday sought for an urgent hearing of the matter. A full bench of the High Court led by Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, has now posted the matter for hearing on Wednesday.
The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday clarified that that the interim order passed by it on February 10, which prohibited wearing of religious dresses by students in classrooms, will apply to both degree colleges and Pre-University (PU) Colleges, where uniform has been prescribed. The Court also clarified that its order applies only to students and not teachers.
A Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court today continued hearing the Respondents in the petitions filed by Muslim girl students, challenging the action of a government college in denying their entry for wearing a hijab (headscarf). Today is the 9th day of the hearing before the Full Bench.
Senior Advocate S. Naganand, appearing for govt PU college, its principal and lecturers today told the Bench comprising Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice JM Khazi that the petitioners had no objection in following the dress code until December 2021. He stated that the college has stipulated uniform since 2004, and it was only now, allegedly at the behest of a radical group that the students are "drum beating" the issue of hijab.
Senior Advocate Devadatt Kamat today made his rejoinder arguments for Muslim girl students, who are before a Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court, challenging the action of a government PU college in denying their entry for wearing a hijab (headscarf). Today is the 10th day of the hearing before the Full Bench. The Bench comprising Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice JM Khazi said it will conclude the hearing tomorrow and reserve judgement thereafter.
10: BREAKING| Hijab Ban: KarnatakaHigh Court Full Bench Reserves Judgement After 11 Days Hearing
A Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court today reserved its judgment in the petitions filed by Muslim girl students, challenging the action of a government PU college in denying their entry for wearing a hijab (headscarf). Hearing before the Full Bench comprising Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice JM Khazi was conducted for 11 days. It may be noted that the Court's interim order, restraining the students from wearing any sort of religious clothes in classrooms, regardless of their faith, is subsisting as of date.
Other Reports:
1: Actor Chetan Kumar Arrested By Karnataka Police Over Tweet Against Judge Hearing 'Hijab Case'
The Bangalore police on Tuesday evening arrested actor and activist Chetan Kumar A, for retweeting an old tweet which he had posted nearly two years ago, criticizing an order passed by Justice Krishna S Dixit in an alleged rape case, who is now part of the full bench hearing a batch of petitions related to the Hijab ban. The police arrested the accused under section 505 (2) [statements creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill-will between classes] and Section 504 [intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace] of the Indian Penal Code. Both non-bailable offences can lead to three years in prison, if convicted.
Case Title: K C Rajanna v. State of Karnataka Case No: WP 4021/2022
The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday directed the State government to place on record, in two weeks time, a report of the investigations done to trace 141 children who are missing from government owned Child Care Institutions.
A division bench of Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice Suraj Govindaraj while issuing notice to the respondents on a public interest litigation filed by Rajnanna K C said, "AGA is granted two weeks time to seek instructions in matter and place on record a report of investigation done to trace 141 missing children."
The Karnataka High Court has ordered that in view of Section 2(e)(ii) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, a challenge to an award in an International Commercial Arbitration can be made before the High Court of Karnataka. As per a circular issued by the registrar (Judicial), a Commercial Division under Section 4(1) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 has been constituted, consisting of a Single Judge at the Principal Bench at Bengaluru and Benches at Dharwad and Kalaburagi.
Case Title: ANI TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED v. STATE OF KARNATAKA
The Karnataka High Court has restrained the state government from taking any coercive steps against ANI Technologies, which operates Ola Cabs, for operating bike taxis in the State. The order will remain in force till the next date of hearing.
A single-judge bench of Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur in its order passed on February 18 said, "It is needless to mention and it is apparent on the face of the record that though the application is filed by the petitioner as long back as 19.04.2021 pursuant to the order of the writ appeal passed by this Court a clear direction was given to the respondents to consider the application preferred by the petitioner herein for grant of permission to use bike taxis within the State of Karnataka."
A Magistrate court in Bengaluru on Friday granted bail to actor and activist Chetan Kumar A, arrested for retweeting an old tweet which he had posted nearly two years ago, criticizing an order passed by Justice Krishna S Dixit in an alleged rape case, who is now part of the full bench hearing a batch of petitions related to the Hijab ban. The court granted bail on the execution of a personal bond of Rs 1 lakh and two solvent sureties of like amount. The court directed that the accused not make, publish, post or circulate any derogatory/provocative statements in any manner so as to disturb communal harmony and public peace.