Karnataka High Court Annual Digest 2023 - Part II [Citations 251 - 504]

Sridhar Kulkarni A And Union of India & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 251

XYZ & ANR And Gurumanjunatha A S & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 252

K Srinivas Ganiga And Union of India & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 253

PRADNYA W/O. ABHIJIT WAINGANKAR And ABHIJIT S/O. MANOHAR WAINGANKAR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 254

Thimmaraju And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 255

Dr. Narasimhalu Nandini & ANR Janatha Trust & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 256

Lalitabai Patil And The Commissioner, Karnataka State Election Commission & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 257

Gopala Sadashiva Gayatri & others And State By Girinagara Police & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 258

Lalitha Siddi And State Of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 259

Karnataka Growers Federation And Government of India. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 260

Rajesh K S N And State By Karnataka Through Mangalore Women Police Station. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 261

V Jagdish Bhatija & ANR And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 262

Dr Shyamala Bai & Others And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 263

Harish Kumar A And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 264

Gopal & ANR And The Deputy Commissioner & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 265

Miss Jirewad Kalyani Sunil AND State of Karnataka & Others. Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 266

ABC And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 267

Neha Rafiq Chahchadi And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 268

H N Nagarajegowda & Others And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 269

Sri. Veeranjaneya Dharma Jagruthi Balaga & Other And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 270

N L Manjunatha & ANR AND B L Ananda. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 271

Arnaud Descamps And Onmobile Global Limited. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 272

D B Ramesh @ Doni Ramesh And State by Excise Police. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 273

Karnataka State Law University And Krishna. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 274

T Sudhakar Pai and Others And M/s Manipal Academy of Higher Education & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 275

Kantharaju And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 276

State of Karnataka & Others And Savantrewwa. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 277

Adity Deepak Kumar And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 278

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation And Nigel Roderick Lloyd Harradine. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 279

Naveen Kumar R @ Naveen & ANR And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 280

Venkatesh & ANR And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 281

Dr Ashok V And The State By Hon'ble Lokayukta of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 282

Special Agricultural Produce Market Committee For Fruits, Flowers and Vegetables And Special Land Acquisition Officer—1 & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 283

N Rajeev AND C Deepa. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 284

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TRANSPORT DEPT & Others And RANJITH K P & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 285

C M Chandra Shekhar And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 286

Mohammed Amjad Pasha And Naseema Banu & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 287

M/S. Vodafone Idea Limited Versus Deputy Director Of Income Tax. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 288

M/s Masturlal (Pvt) Ltd And Government of India. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 289

Mustafa s/o Maktumsab Rasoolanavar And The State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 290

Emmanuel Michael And Union of India. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 291

Lok Shikshan Trust & Others And Davalsab S/O Malliksab Nadaf. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 292

Nabisab s/o. Huchchesab Agnnamani AND Hatelsab s/o Huchchedab Sannamani. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 293

Vittal And The PSI of Bableshwar Police Station. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 294

A Amarnath Chagu And Union of India. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 295

FIS Payment Solutions And Services India Private Limited Versus The State Of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 296

Rasik Lal Patel & ANR AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 297

M/s Legal Property & ANR And Chief Manager, State Bank of India & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 298

ABC And XYZ. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 299

The Divisional Manager United India Insurance Company Ltd And Ramu @ Ramesh S/O Yallappa & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 300

Nanjamma & Others AND Rajamma & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 301

ABC And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 302

Sanjay P S And Abhishek M. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 303

Smt. Renuka & Ors. v Sri Venkatesh. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 304

State By PI MESCON v B Usman Beary. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 305

Shashikala & Others And Laxman Yadu Kadam and Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 306

N Ravindranath Kamath And Sri Subramanyeshwara Cooperative Bank Limited & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 307

SIVA RAMA KRISHNA And MR.SASI NARKIS BABU V & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 308

Raufuddin Kacheriwalay & Others And State of Karnataka & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 309

Malathy S B & Others AND State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 310

Nova Medical Centers Pvt Ltd And Sowmya & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 311

Girinath B And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 312

Vinayak Metrani And Gadigevva @ Neelavva & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 313

Krishnaprasad A AND L Doreswamy. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 314

Ananth Kumar K G And Yogita S @ Yogitha Ananth Kumar. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 315

Jagath Prakash Nadda And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 316

M J MAthew & others And Prestige St. Johns Wood Apartment Owners Association & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 317

Mahantayya And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 318

Ramesh Naik L And Karnataka State Bar Council and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 319

Chandra & Others AND G. Krishnappa. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 320

Dr Pooja S N v Union of India & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 321

Abdul Khadar @ Rafiq And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 322

Sam P Philip & Others v State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 323

Mahadev And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 324

MANSA–Centre for Development and Social Action v. Managing Director, Development Credit Bank & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 325

Sugurappa @ Sugurayya Swami v. The State Of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 326

Saibanna s/o Ningappa Natikar AND The Union of India & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 327

The Union of India v. Malini & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 328

Muzammil & ANR v. State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 329

Dr Lakhsmi P Gowda AND National Board of Examinations In Medical Sciences & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 330

Hampamma & Others And State Through Lingasugur P.S. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 331

A S MALLIKARJUNASWAMY, AND STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 332

Naveen Kumar H N & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 333

M/s Deco Equipments Pvt Ltd AND The State of Karnataka & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 334.

P Ramaprasad And Thyagaraj R & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 335

Jambo Plastics Pvt. Ltd & Others AND Chief Quality Assurance Establishment & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 336

Project Vruksha Foundation V State Board For Wildlife (SBWL). 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 337

Dr Kallappa Mahadevappa Hosmani AND The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Karnataka Lokayukta. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 338

A MANJU And PRAJWAL REVANNA @ PRAJWAL R. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 339

Abdul Rehman And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 340

Shrenika And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (kar) 341

XYZ And ABC. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 342

Usmanshah And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 343

NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY AND MUGIL ANBU VASANTHA & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 344

T Ramesh Babu And The Inquiry Authority & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 345

XYZ & ANR AND NIL. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 346

Chikkanna And Karnataka Legislative Assembly Secretariat & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 347

Mrs Saraswathi S P And The Commissioner & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 348

Umapathi S AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 349

United Spirits Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 350

ABC And XYZ. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 351

Pallavi G M And Managing Director & Others. LiveLaw (Kar) 352

Mrs. Eulalia Sequeira Nee Menezes and Cyril Anthony Menezes & Others. LiveLaw (Kar) 353

Alok Kumar v Mallikarjun B M alias Ravi. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 354

Meenakumari K R And Mission Director (NRLM) & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 355

Fathima Richelle Mather v. Registrar of Births and Deaths & Commissioner, BBMP. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 356

ABC AND XYZ. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 357

Veerbhadra Gowda & ANR AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 358

Mohan Vasudev Chavan And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 359

Vivekananda Kemali And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 360

Chinnaswamy Gowda And Shivramu C M Shivaramu & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 361

D Roopa And Rohini Sindhuri. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 362

Pigeon Education Technology India Private Limited And Directorate of Enforcement & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 363

Girish Bharadwaj & Others And Union of India & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 364

Santosh & Others And State Through Ashok Nagar PS. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 365

Dr Mohan Bhatta M R And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 366

Babu s/o Shankarappa Mukkannvar And Union of India & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 367

Kum Sowmya R AND Registrar General & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 368

Vikram & Others AND Union of India & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 369

The Divisional Manager The New India Insurance Company Ltd AND Nagaraj. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 370

Amrit Paul And State By High Ground PS. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 371

Rajesh K N & K R Umesh & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 372

State of Karnataka AND Malleshnaika. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 373

Mangala Gowri And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 374

Bhimappa Gundappa Gadad And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 375

ABC & State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 376

K Y Nanjegowda & Others And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 377

High Court of Karnataka And Dr Ekta Singh. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 378

Shivamma & Others AND Govind Malothu & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 379

Rajesh Totaganti And State of Karnataka & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 380

Megha J And Life Insurance Corporation of India. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 381

Severine Lobo And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 382

High Court of Karnataka v State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 383

ABC & XYZ. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 384.

M/s Chancery Pavilion And M/s Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd & Others.2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 385

Sharada Hanamanth Walagad & ANR AND NIL. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 386

Shreeroopa v. State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 387

Pramod Hanumanth Rao Muthalik & Anr v State of Karnataka & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 388

Vivek Hebbale And Sahitya Akademi & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 389

Bengaluru Metropolitan Transport Corporation Limited And H B Siddarajaiah. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 390

Informant v State of Karnataka & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 391

Narendra Babu G.V & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 392

Somashekhar And State by Rural Police Station. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 393

M/s Divyajyothi Vidya Kendra And Karnataka Housing Board & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 394

Rajiv & Others And State Bank of India. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 395

Jayashree And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 396

Rajasingh Takur @ T Raja Singh & Others And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 397

Sudarshan Ramesh AND Union of India & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 398

T N Susheelamma & ANR AND Chirag Raghavendra & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 399

Sampanna Mutalik & ANR AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 400.

D K Shivakumar AND Central Bureau of Investigation. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 401

Aslam Pasha AND Chief Commissioner & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 402

Dr Nehal Bansal AND Central Bureau of Investigation. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 403

XYZ And ABC. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 404

Karnataka State Highways Improvement Project AND M/s. KMC - VDB (JV). 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 405

Umadevi M And Joint Commissioner (East) Zone & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 406

Tayamma @Thippamma & Others AND K Ramappa & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 407

Shivalingappa B. Kerakalamatti And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 408

Sushil Mantri & Others AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 409

Narayan Jamadar AND Karnataka State Police Department. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 410

Future Gen. India Ins. Co. Ltd AND Zeenath Begum & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 411

Rajarajeshwari Dental College and Hospital And Dr Sanjay Murgod. Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 412

Dr Siddaiah S AND State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 413

Hanamantraya AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 414

Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited AND S Kiran. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 415

Ditul Mehta & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 416

CHAMARAJPET NAGARIKAR OKKUTA ® AND State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 417

Ramesh B S And Navaneetha. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 418

D Venkatesh AND The Registrar of Cooperative Societies & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 418

Srinivas Sagar B & Others And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 419

Dr Uday Mulgund And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 420

B Narayana & Others AND State Of Karnataka & Others. 2023 (Kar) LiveLaw 421

Manjula @ Manju And The Chief Secretary & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 422

Ashok M.S & Others And The Anti Corruption Bureau & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 423

Prof B Shivaraj And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 424

Kavitha R & ANR AND The Assistant Commissioner. 2023 (Kar) LiveLaw 425.

Dr. Shivamurthy Murugha Sharanaru And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 426

Devaraj P R And Karnataka Cooperative Milk Producers Federation Limited. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 427

ABC And XYZ. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 428

Chandan N V and Others AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 429.

Ganesh Achar AND United India Insurance Co LTD. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 430

T Savitha & ANR AND B P Muniraju & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 431

Hanumantharayappa AND State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 432

Karan Singh S Rajpurohit And The City Municipal Council Hosapete & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 433

Lakshmamma AND D R Sudeep and Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 434

Akkamahadevi & Others And Neelambika & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 435

Ranagaswamy B T And Union of India and Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 436

Zameer Ahmed Khan AND The State of Karnataka By Lokayukta P.S. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 437

Ashok D Sanadi And The Chief Secretary & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 438

Sayyad Murtuza Sayyad Kasim Haji AND State of Karnataka & Other. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 439

XXX AND Union of India & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 440

Kalavathi And Director General and Inspector General of Police & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 441

Chikkaredappa And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 442

Palaksha S S AND The State By Vidhana Soudha Police Station and Another. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 443

Balaji & Others And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 444

R Pramod v Gangadharaiah. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 445

Vijaya Ganapati And M/s Intuit Technology Services Private Ltd. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 446

Pandurangabhat & Others And State By Malebennur Police And Another. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 447

Sai Lakshmi And Chief Registrar of Births and Deaths & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 448

Mahalakshmamma And The Secretary, Department of Rural Development and Panchayatraj. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 449

Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited & Other And Mallikarjun Savanur. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 450

The Deputy Director General & FAA Central Public Information Officer & Another AND P Lavanya & Another. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 451

H V Ashok And H N Gopal and Other. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 452

Ganesh V v. State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 453

D. K. Shivakumar And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 454

Dr. C. Vishwanath Reddy & Another v. The Commissioner BBMP & Another. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 455

Manimala @Roopa AND K Satish Kumar. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 456

Karnataka State Highways Improvement Project AND M/s. KMC - VDB (JV). 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 457

Sanju v. The State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 458

C G Jagdish AND State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 459

Santhosh Beejadi Srinivas AND Union of India & Another. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 460

Srishti Daiv & ANR AND NIL. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 461

Hangal Taluka Civil Contractors Association AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 462

Ann Nimmi Sebastian v. State of Karnataka and Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 463

Chikkagundappa And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 464

Renuka Yamunappa Golasangi v. Mohan Naik. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 465

Dr Jonathan Jaideep AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 466

Syed Esa Ibrahim & ANR AND State By Channapatna East PS. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 467

Avenue Supermarts LTD AND Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 468

Mohan Nayak N AND State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 469

Mohammad Shafiulla AND The D. G. AND I.G.P. Of Police & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 470

Dr V L Nandish AND The Commissioner Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 471

Anitha H And Principal District and Session Judge. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 472

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AND State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 473

Yallappa & Another AND Kallavva Kuriyavar. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 474

Mubeen Unnisa Begum AND State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 475

Ms X v State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 476

Nikkitha K J AND Union of India & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 477

Rajesh Kumar Shetty And T Subbaya Shetty & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 478

Nitin Kasliwal And Debt Recovery Tribunal I. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 479

Indian Rail Mazdoor Union And The Chairman And Chief Executive Officer Railway Board & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 480

M/s B M Habitat AND The Commissioner And Competent Authority. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 481

Laxman Warad & Others AND Town Municipal Council. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 482

Karnataka Rajya Anganvadi Karya Kartheyara Mathu Sahaya AND Union of India & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 483

Muddumadaiah And B Jyothi. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 484

Mohammed Yasin Naikwadi AND Aneesa Mohammed Yasin Naikwadi & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 485

Dr Ambedkar Scheduled Castes Federation Karnataka AND Union of India & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 486

Sharmada B K AND The Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 487

Mutti AND Kucharu & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 488

Gulihatti D Shekar AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 489.

K Madal Virupakshappa AND State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 490

Mohammed Noman Ahmed Almeri AND Union of India & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 491

Pusha AND Y Jansi Rani. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 492

M/s SKF India Limited v. A V Nagabhushana. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 493

D L Ramesh v. Marilingaiah. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 494

M/s Om SLV Constructions AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 495

Vasundhara A.G.K AND The Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 496

Anupam Singh Tomar AND State By Kothanur Police & Another. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 497

EIT Services India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 498

M/S Myntra Designs Private Limited Versus National Faceless Assessment Centre. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 499

M/s GROUP 4 SECURITAS GUARDING LIMITED AND The Regional Director, ESI Corporation. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 500

Almas Pasha AND The State Of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 501

Dr. Annaiah N AND State of Karnataka & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 502.

Kalyanamurthy K AND State Bank of India. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 503

M/S Tejas Arecanut Traders Versus Joint Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 504

Judgments

Re-Issue Of Passport On Being Lost Cannot Be Done Without Registering FIR With Police: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Sridhar Kulkarni A And Union of India & ANR

Case No: WP 9248/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 251

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday rejected a petition seeking direction to Regional Passport officer to re-issue petitioner's passport on him having lost the passport, without him registering a First Information Report with the police as is prescribed under the rules framed under the Passport Act.

A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit while dismissing the petition of one Sridhar Kulkarni A said, “Right to travel abroad is a Fundamental right is true but it is regulated by the Passport Act and rules framed thereunder. If rules prescribe a procedure, one has to follow the same by making appropriate application along with the requisite documents."

Karnataka HC Upholds Reduction Of Maintenance To 'Capable' Wife; Says She Can't Sit Idle, Can Only Seek 'Supportive Maintenance' From Husband

Case Title: XYZ & ANR And Gurumanjunatha A S & Others

Case No: Criminal Revision Petition no.1324 of 2015

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 252

The Karnataka High Court has rejected a petition filed by a woman challenging the order of the Appellate court reducing the maintenance and compensation amount granted to her by the Magistrate court on filing of an application under section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

A single judge bench of Justice Rajendra Badamikar observed that the petitioner-wife was working prior to her marriage and there is no explanation as to why she is incapable of working now. It added, “She is not supposed to sit idle and seek entire maintenance from her husband and she is also legally bound to make some efforts to meet her livelihood and she can seek only supportive maintenance from her husband.”

Senior Citizens Act | Lawyers Allowed To Represent Parties Before Maintenance Tribunal, Karnataka HC Declares Bar U/S 17 Ultra Vires Advocates Act

Case Title: K Srinivas Ganiga And Union of India & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.1912 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 253

The Karnataka High Court has declared Section 17 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, which bars advocates from representing parties before the tribunals/forums constituted under the Act, as ultra vires of Section 30 of the Advocates' Act, 1961. It has thus permitted Advocates to represent parties before the tribunal/forums.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna held,“Parties to the lis cannot always be said to be conversant with terms, to be knowing the nuances of law of evidence, both oral or documentary, as to what is to be produced before the Tribunal. It is, therefore, a legal aid is necessary to such senior citizens. Legal aid, is trite, a facet of the constitutional right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and such legal aid or legal assistance cannot be stifled or crippled only to tendering advice.”

Cruelty Allegations Uncontroverted: Karnataka HC Sets Aside Order Denying Divorce To Wife For Not Honouring Restitution Of Conjugal Rights Decree

Case Title: PRADNYA W/O. ABHIJIT WAINGANKAR And ABHIJIT S/O. MANOHAR WAINGANKAR

Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103166 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 254

The Karnataka High Court has allowed an appeal filed by a woman and set aside the order of the family court rejecting her plea for dissolving marriage, stating that despite the court allowing the application moved by the husband for restitution of conjugal rights, she had not returned to the matrimonial home.

A division bench of Justice S G Pandit and Justice Vijaykumar A Patil, said “The family Court has committed an error in recording the finding that despite the judgment in M.C.No.280/2019, the appellant has failed to join matrimonial home. The family Court has not considered the case of the appellant on its merits for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty.”

Karnataka High Court Quashes Abetment To Suicide Charge Levelled Against Friend Of Dead Woman's Husband

Case Title: Thimmaraju And State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 566 OF 2020

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 255

The Karnataka High Court recently quashed abetment to suicide charges levelled against a man who was alleged to have caused the suicide of his friend's wife by making allegations on her character.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said none of the ingredients necessary to prove an offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC are made out. It observed,

"For an offence to become punishable under Section 306 of IPC, the ingredients as obtaining under Section 107 of IPC is imperative. Section 107 of IPC deals with abatement. Any of the ingredients that are of Section 107 of IPC being present in a crime, then, it would become a matter of trial for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC."

Section 92 CPC Procedure Not Applicable To Suit Instituted By Public Charitable Trust Against Third Parties: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Dr. Narasimhalu Nandini & ANR Janatha Trust & Others

Case No: Writ Petition no.203194 of 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 256

The Karnataka High Court has held that a Public Charitable Trust is not required to take permission from the jurisdictional district court under Section 92 of Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), before filing a suit for permanent injunction against a third party.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj sitting at Kalaburagi bench dismissed the petition filed by Dr Narasimhalu Nandini Memorial Education Trust and others, challenging trial court order which rejected their application under Section 92, seeking dismissal of the suit filed by Janatha Trust, a Public Charitable Trust for non-compliance of the mandate under the provision.

Karnataka Gram Panchayat Act | No Show Cause Notice For Removal Of Member Over Failure To Annually Disclose Assets U/S 43B: High Court

Case Title: Lalitabai Patil And The Commissioner, Karnataka State Election Commission & ANR

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 200760 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 257

The Karnataka High Court has declared that no show-cause notice is required to be issued to a defaulting member of a Gram Panchayat under Section 43B(1) of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 when there is no assets/liabilities declaration filed by him. Similarly, no hearing is required to be given before passing an order of removal from the office.

Section 43B stipulates that every member shall, within three months from the date of commencement of his term of office and until the expiry of his term in every calendar year, and within one month of the end of the financial year, file a declaration of the movable and immovable assets and liabilities of more than two lakhs owned by him and by all the members of his joint family before the state election commission.

Can't Be Taken Lightly: Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash Proceedings Against Five For Allegedly Demanding Money To Withdraw PIL Against Mutt

Case Title: Gopala Sadashiva Gayatri & others And State By Girinagara Police & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4835 OF 2021

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 258

The Karnataka High Court recently dismissed a petition filed by five persons seeking to quash proceedings initiated against them for allegedly demanding money from the Chief Administrator Officer of Ramachandrapura Mutt for withdrawing a PIL filed by Gokarna Hitha Rakshana Samithi against the Mutt, alleging financial irregularities.

A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan said, “Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the offence committed by the accused cannot be taken in a lighter way as they have filed PIL case and demanded Rs.5 crores for withdrawing the said case and were caught red handed while accepting Rs.10 lakh. The Police have thoroughly investigated the matter and filed the charge sheet. Therefore, there is a prima facie material for framing of charges against the accused persons. Therefore, the proceedings cannot be quashed.”

POCSO Court Bound To Determine Compensation Considering Gravity, Victim's Status; Role Of DLSA Is Only To Enforce It: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Lalitha Siddi And State Of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100269 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 259

In the context of PCOSO trials, the Karnataka High Court has held that only the special court has power to quantify the compensation to the child victims under NALSA scheme and that DLSA is under legal obligation to give effect to the compensation determined by the special Court.

It added that while determining compensation, the trial court has to consider the evidence on record, nature of injury suffered by the victim, the circumstance under which the offence has been committed, the need of the victim child for rehabilitation, medical treatment, education of the victim, etc.

A single judge bench of Justice Anil K Batti sitting at Dharwad observed, "It is obligatory on the part of Special Court Judges under POCSO Act to determine appropriate compensation to which victim child is entitled in the light of NALSA's scheme and Rule 9 of [POCSO] Rules 2020 till the framing of a compensation scheme specifically for a child victims in POCSO cases. The role of DLSA is to enforce the compensation determined by the Special Court and to make payment to the victim child in terms of Rule 10 of Rules 2020 in compliance with the circular issued by this court as referred above."

Karnataka High Court Says Healthcare Centres Be Connected With Control Rooms To Attend Those Injured In Man-Animal Conflicts

Case Title: Karnataka Growers Federation And Government of India

Case No: WP 24307/2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 260

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday suggested that 24*7 control rooms set up by the State government for receipt of information about man-animal conflicts in areas surrounding forests be connected with Civil hospitals and Primary Healthcare Centres for immediate attention to those injured.

It said “We direct the State government to extend the access of control room to the nearest Primary Health Centre (PHC) and the District Civil Hospital, through the Resident Medical Officer of PHC and Civil Surgeon attached to Civil hospital, so that in case an information in respect of some seriously injured person is shared with the control room, it can forward it to nearest PHC and or the District Civil hospital and on receipt of such information necessary medical assistance or first aid can be provided to injured."

Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash Law Intern's Rape FIR Against Advocate, Says It May Have Chilling Effect On Legal Profession

Case Title: Rajesh K S N And State By Karnataka Through Mangalore Women Police Station.

Case No: Criminal Petition no.10550 of 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 261

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash a rape complaint registered against a Magaluru based advocate by a law student working as an intern in his office.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna observed, "If a naive student of law, enters the office of an Advocate, as an intern; in turn gets to face these horrendous acts, it would have a chilling effect on the entire practice and profession. Therefore, it is for the accused to come out clean in a full blown trial."

Consumer Forum Member's 'Caste Hurl' Complaint Against Landlords Quashed By Karnataka High Court

Case Title: V Jagdish Bhatija & ANR And State of Karnataka

Case No: CRL.P 4384/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 262

The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday quashed the proceedings initiated under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act by a "disgruntled tenant" who happens to be a member of the District Consumer Forum, against her landlords.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna found the narration in her complaint quite strange and said permitting further investigation against the petitioners would amount to abuse of process of law.

Karnataka High Court Quashes Medical Negligence Complaint In Absence Of Expert Opinion

Case Title: Dr Shyamala Bai & Others And State of Karnataka & ANR

Case NO: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2264 OF 2017

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 263

The Karnataka High Court recently quashed a medical negligence case registered against three doctors as the police failed to support the charge by obtaining an expert's opinion.

A single judge bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum allowed the quashing petition observing, “If the Medical Council of India (MCI) while entertaining the appeal has concluded that there is no medical negligence, I am of the view that the proceedings are liable to be quashed.”

Duty Of Trial Court To Give Time To Accused To Engage Counsel For Cross Examining Prosecution Witnesses: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Harish Kumar A And State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: Criminal Appeal no. 1167 of 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 264

The Karnataka High Court has set aside an order of conviction handed down to an accused found guilty of outraging the modesty of a woman as the accused could not cross examine the prosecution witnesses.

A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan remanded the matter back to the Trial Court for fresh consideration, observing, “Of course, speedy trial is mandatory, however, denial of providing an opportunity to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses, which is nothing but denial of fair trial under Guaranteed Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”

If An Able Bodied Person Is Bound To Maintain His Wife, Why Not Dependent Mother? Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Gopal & ANR And The Deputy Commissioner & Others

Case No: Writ Petition no. 13182 of 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 265

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by the sons of an aged woman against an order of the Deputy Commissioner that directed them to pay her maintenance amount of Rs 10,000, under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act.

A Single judge bench of Justice Krishan S Dixit dismissed the petition filed by Gopal and others who questioned the order directing them to pay Rs 10,000 to their 84-year-old mother who is residing with their sister. “If an able bodied person is bound to maintain his dependent wife, there is no reason why such a rule should not apply when it comes to the case of a dependent mother. An argument to the contra falls foul of law & religion, to which the Petitioners belong.”

Karnataka High Court Directs Ayurveda College To Surrender One Management Seat To Govt For Admitting Student Beyond Cut-Off Date

Case Title: Miss Jirewad Kalyani Sunil AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 13658 OF 2023, C/W Writ Petition No. 11214 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 266

The Karnataka High Court has directed the Mangalore-based Karnataka Ayurveda Medical College to surrender one management seat to the government during the next academic year i.e., 2024-25, for admitting a student beyond the cut off date.

Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum also imposed a cost of Rs 5 lakh on the college to be deposited with the Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences and directed the College to submit an undertaking to the University stating that it will not repeat such a mistake of admitting the students beyond the cut-off date.

Karnataka High Court Grants Bail To Juvenile Accused Of Sexual Offence, Says Mother Fit Person To Keep Him Under Custody

Case Title: ABC And State of Karnataka & ANR Case No:

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 100453 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 267

The Karnataka High Court recently granted bail to a juvenile accused of committing penetrative sexual assault on a minor, directing his mother to execute personal bond and surety bond and undertake to ensure the juvenile does not waste his time in "unproductive and excessive recreational pursuits".

The direction was passed by a single bench of Justice Anil B Katti upon noticing that the triple test under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act is not satisfied in this case. Reliance was placed on Allahabad High Court's decision in XXX Juvenile v. State of UP which held that a juvenile has to be released on bail mandatorily unless the exceptions carved out in proviso to Section 12(1) are made out.

S.78 Information Technology Act Mandates Probe, Not Registration Of FIR By Officer Not Below Rank Of Police Inspector: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Neha Rafiq Chahchadi And State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102165 OF 2019

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 268

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that as per Section 78 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 an officer below the rank of Police Inspector can register FIR for offence punishable under Section 66E of the Act, but the investigation is to be conducted by a person who is not below the rank of an Inspector of Police.

A single judge bench of Justice V Srishananda sitting at Dharwad bench dismissed a petition filed by one Neha Rafiq Chachad questioning the registration of FIR against her for allegedly opening a fake Instagram account in the name of the complainant and posting obscene and obnoxious posts.

Minute Procedural Aberration In Magistrate's Order Rejecting 'B' Report And Taking Cognizance Doesn't Prejudice Accused: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: H N Nagarajegowda & Others And State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2746 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 269

The Karnataka High Court has rejected a petition filed by eight murder accused challenging Magistrate court's order taking cognizance of the offence alleged against them and rejecting the 'B Report' filed by the police.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna rejected the petitioner's contention regarding procedural defects in the cognizance order as the sworn statement was recorded even before the rejection of the 'B' report.

Right To Associate Constitutionally Guaranteed, People Gathering To Pay Homage To Deceased Innocents Long Standing Tradition: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Sri. Veeranjaneya Dharma Jagruthi Balaga & Other And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WP 15400 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 270

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday permitted an unincorporated organisation of persons to organise a gathering and pay homage to one Venugoapal, a social worker and Hindu activist, who was killed by miscreants during Hanuman Jayanti celebrations.

A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit observed, “The Right to associate and association are constitutionally guaranteed. People gathering for paying homage on the death of innocents has been a long tradition in the society, the only requirement is that they have to ensure that no untoward incident would happen and that all precautions in that regard would be taken.”

Adoption Deed Not Must If Conditions Of Hindu Adoption & Maintenance Act Properly Complied: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: N L Manjunatha & ANR AND B L Ananda

Case NO: REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 443 OF 2009

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 271

The Karnataka High Court has said that an adoption deed or registered document is not a must to prove the adoption of a child. If conditions of valid adoptions as required under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 are established, it is sufficient to prove the adoption.

A Single judge bench of Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar dismissed an appeal filed by one N.L. Manjunatha who had challenged the order of the trial court and the first appellate court decreeing the suit for partition of ancestral property, in favour of the B.L. Ananda (respondent herein), who is the brother of the appellant.

Decide Issue Of Jurisdiction First: Karnataka HC Sets Aside Trial Court Order Restraining French Resident From Making Statement Against Ex-Employer

Case Title: Arnaud Descamps And Onmobile Global Limited

Case No: M.F.A. NO.4019/2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 272

The Karnataka High Court has set aside an order passed by the trial court restraining a former employee of a company from making any statement, remarks and/or imputations against the company and its management in any social media, public forum and before any other entities.

A single judge bench of Justice H P Sandesh allowed the appeal filed by Arnaud Descamps, a resident of France, and set aside the order passed on the application made by Onmobile Global Limited. It remitted back the matter to the Trial Court to consider the issue of 'jurisdiction' in passing the restraint order. It observed, “Trial Court has not discussed with regard to the issue of jurisdiction whether the Court has got jurisdiction to entertain the suit and what are all the materials placed before the Court to invoke the jurisdiction of the Trial Court, while granting the relief but, the Trial Court failed to take note of the said fact into consideration.”

No Bar On Considering Evidence Of Official Witnesses If It's Free From Suspicion: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: D B Ramesh @ Doni Ramesh And State by Excise Police

Case No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 779 OF 2020

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 273

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that there is no bar that evidence of official witnesses is to be discarded, and if the evidence is beyond all suspicious reasons, there is no reason for ignoring the evidence.

A single judge of Justice Rajendra Badamikar dismissed the appeal filed by accused D B Ramesh and upheld the order of the trial and revision court convicting him for offences under section 32(1) of the Karnataka Excise Act and Section 273 of the Indian Penal Code.

No Stringent Distinction Based On Nature Of Ailment In Guidelines For Alternative Objective Exam For Differently Abled Students: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Karnataka State Law University And Krishna

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 722 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 274

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by the Karnataka State Law University challenging a single bench order directing it to conduct III Semester exam for a differently abled Law student, by providing objective type of questions instead of descriptive type of questions.

Krishna, having 46% overall impairment affecting both brain and eyes, is pursuing his five years integrated law degree at Vaikunta Baliga Law College. Since he was unable to write by hand as such for the I Semester exam he utilised the facility of scribe. He was however informed by the college that unless permission was granted by the University, it cannot permit him to take the help of a scribe for examinations in future.

Karnataka High Court Issues Guidelines On Civil Imprisonment For Wilful Disobedience Of Judicial Orders

Case Title: T Sudhakar Pai and Others And M/s Manipal Academy of Higher Education & Others

Case No: COMMERCIAL APPEAL NO.404 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 275

The Karnataka High Court recently issued a set of guidelines to be followed by the trial courts while ordering civil imprisonment to an accused for wilful disobedience of court orders under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure.

A division bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde said, “The underlying philosophy of the provision is curative and to enforce the compliance of the Court order rather than to punish the wrongdoer. At the same time, it is equally important that any party to the litigation should not carry the impression that one who violates the interim order is entitled to a long rope. The provision also has a very important role to play in upholding the rule of law, the majesty of the Court, and ensuring the credibility of the Court order.”

Second Wife Can't Maintain Complaint Against Husband And In-Laws U/S 498A IPC: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Kantharaju And State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1372 OF 2019

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 276

The Karnataka High Court has said that a complaint under Section 498-A (cruelty) of the Indian Penal Code, filed by the second wife against the husband and her in-laws is not maintainable.

A single judge bench of Justice S Rachaiah allowed the petition filed by one Kantharaju and set aside the conviction order passed by the trial court and the revision court convicting him for section 498-A on the complaint filed by his second wife.

Karnataka High Court Reverses Order Granting Freedom Fighters' Pension To 89-Yrs Old Widow

Case Title: State of Karnataka & Others And Savantrewwa

Case No. WA No 100210/2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 277

The Karnataka High Court has set aside the order of a Single bench which directed State authorities to grant freedom fighters' pension together with all arrears to an 89-year-old widow.

A division bench of Justice R Devdas and Justice Rajesh Rai K sitting at Dharwad allowed the State's appeal observing, “In the year 2014 the guidelines issued by the Central Government in respect of the disbursement of 'Central Government Sanman Pension Scheme' which was followed by the State Government also, passed an order that 'No pension shall be sanctioned in the name of freedom fighter after his/her death even his/her matter was under examination'. Hence, in our considered opinion, the first appellant (State Government) rightly rejected the claim of the respondent for grant of freedom fighters' pension.”

'Systematic Discrimination': Karnataka High Court Pulls Up College For Charging Tuition Fees From Student Admitted Under Supernumerary Quota

Case Title: Adity Deepak Kumar And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.11724 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 278

"The implementation of supernumerary quota in educational institutions aims to foster inclusivity and provide equal opportunities to underrepresented groups. However, a disturbing trend has emerged where some educational institutions engage in wrongful conduct by charging fees to students admitted through the supernumerary quota,” the Karnataka High Court observed recently.

A single judge bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum was dealing with a case whereby an Engineering college in Mysore had adjusted the scholarship amount awarded to a student admitted under the supernumerary quota, towards her tuition fees.

Karnataka High Court Says London Court's Order Directing KSRTC To Compensate British Couple For Accident Not On Merits, Not Executable

Case Title: Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation And Nigel Roderick Lloyd Harradine

Case No: CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.453/2017

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 279

The Karnataka High Court has allowed an application filed by the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) under Section 47 of Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), and held that a decree issued by a court in the United Kingdom (UK), directing compensation be paid to a British couple who suffered injuries when they met with an accident in 2002, while travelling in a car which was hit by a KSRTC bus, is not executable in law as the same is not on merits.

The decree holders had filed a case in Ashford Country Court and obtained the judgment and decree in their favour. The court in UK had vide its order dated 22-02-2007, directed KSRTC to pay the claimants- Nigel Roderick Lloyd Harradine and his wife Carol- a sum of £31431.33.

Data Theft Becoming A Menace Of Digital Age, Must Be Nipped In The Bud: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Naveen Kumar R @ Naveen & ANR And State of Karnataka.

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3173 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 280

Data thieving has become a menace in these digital days and will have to be nipped, the Karnataka High Court observed recently.

The remarks were made by a single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna while refusing to quash the proceedings initiated against two persons accused of having stolen client data from their previous employer and misusing it by joining a rival company. The petitioners have been charged under sections 408, 504, 506 of the IPC and under Sections 66 and 66C of the Information Technology Act.

Change In Law By Apex Court Decision Doesn't Upset Prior Judgments Of Competent Court, Erroneous Decisions Can Operate As Res Judicata: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Venkatesh & ANR And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.11112 OF 2021

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 281

The Karnataka High Court has said that a divergent view taken by the Supreme Court on an issue is not binding on judgments passed prior to it by the competent courts and therefore, the principle of res judicata will apply between the same parties on the same issue.

A single judge bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum said, “The law laid down by the Apex Court in the case at the most can be treated as a change in law but that would not upset the earlier judgments.”

The petitioners Venkatesh and Ramesh had approached the Court seeking a direction to the authorities to forthwith restore peaceful vacant possession of the schedule property which was earlier granted to the original grantee Krishna (Father of the petitioners) under Rule 43(G) of the Mysuru Land Revenue Rules.

S.17A Prevention Of Corruption Act | Private Complaint Against Public Servant Should Also Be Accompanied By Prior Sanction: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Dr Ashok V And The State By Hon'ble Lokayukta of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.531 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 282

The Karnataka High Court has held that private complaints filed without prior approval (sanction) from competent authorities under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, against public servants should not be entertained by the Magistrate/Sessions Judge.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said, “This Court has come across several cases where private complaints are preferred by the complainants where, they do not approach the Investigating Agency like the Karnataka Lokayukta, but choose an alternate route of knocking at the doors of the Magistrate or the Sessions Judge. At that stage, what the Magistrate/Sessions Judge would do, is refer the matter under Section 156 (3) for investigation. Once the matter is referred for investigation, the Police / Lokayukta would have no choice but to register a crime. What happens in this process is the protective filter for vexatious, frivolous or malicious prosecution against the public servants created by the Parliament by the amendment in the year 2018 bringing in Section 17A to the Act is rendered illusory.”

Differences Between State And Its Entities Ought To Be Resolved On A Separate Platform, Not In Courts: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Special Agricultural Produce Market Committee For Fruits, Flowers and Vegetables And Special Land Acquisition Officer—1 & others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 20905 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 283

The Karnataka High Court has referred the petition moved by the Special Agricultural Produce Market Committee, raising a dispute regarding the quantum of compensation to be paid for acquisition of its land for construction of a metro line, to a committee headed by the Chief Secretary of the State.

A Single judge bench of Justice Sunil Dutt Yadav remarked, “Differences between State and its entities ought to be resolved in a separate platform and cannot land up for adjudication before the Courts which even otherwise are overburdened. The State and its entities are to contribute to lowering matters that end up before Courts for adjudication in a meaningful manner.”

Divorce Cases Should Be Decided By Family Courts Within One Year: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: N Rajeev AND C Deepa

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 14769 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 284

The Karnataka High Court has said courts (trial courts) should make all efforts to try and dispose off matrimonial cases, which involve prayer for the dissolution/nullity of marriage, within an outer limit of one year.

A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit said “Matrimonial causes should be tried & disposed off on a war footing, at least as a concession to the shortness of human life.” Pointing out the importance of early disposal the bench said “So that in the event of granting such a decree, the parties may restructure their lives.”

BH-Series Vehicle: Karnataka High Court Upholds Single Bench Decision Against Exclusion Of Private Sector Employees

Case Title: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TRANSPORT DEPT & Others And RANJITH K P & others

Case No: WA 191/2023 C/W 196/2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 285

The Karnataka High Court on Thursday dismissed an appeal preferred by the State Government against a Single bench decision directing the Transport Commissioner to register the vehicles of two private sector company employees under BH-series, whose offices are in more than four states.

A Division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice M G S Kamal passed the order. A detailed copy of the order is still to be made available.

The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways in August 2021 introduced "Bharath Series (BH-Series)" registration mark for new vehicles; the marking will not require an assignment of a new registration mark when the owner of the vehicle shifts from one State to another.

Karnataka High Court Refuses To Interfere With Magistrate Court Order Charging HC's Ex-Deputy Registrar As Co-Accused In Misappropriation Case

Case Title: C M Chandra Shekhar And State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 204 OF 2014

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 286

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed the petition filed by a former Deputy Registrar of the High Court challenging a Magistrate court's order allowing an application filed under Section 319 CrPC and making him a co-accused in a misappropriation of funds case.

The application was moved by primary accused Jayaram Nayak, who was working as a Section Officer in the High Court's Accounts Branch.

The allegation against them was regarding withdrawal of Rs. 20 lakh without orders from the Finance Committee and without any entry in the cheque encashment register of Accounts Branch. The complaint was lodged with the prior permission from the Registrar General and the Chief Justice.

'Holy Quran Says Duty Of Husband To Look After Wife & Children, Especially When They Are In Disablement': Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Mohammed Amjad Pasha And Naseema Banu & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 8505 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 287

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed the petition filed by a Muslim man challenging an order granting maintenance in favour of his wife and children.

A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit rejected the petition filed by one Mohammed Amjad Pasha who claimed that he does not have sufficient means to pay a collective maintenance of Rs 25,000 to his wife and minor children. The bench said, “Holy Quran and Hadith say that it is the duty of a husband to look after his wife & children especially when they are in disablement. No material is produced to show that the Respondent-wife is gainfully employed or that she has any source of income. Even otherwise the principal duty lies on the shoulders of the petitioner.”

Vodafone Idea Not Liable To Deduct TDS On Inter-Connectivity Usage & Bandwidth Charges: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: M/S. Vodafone Idea Limited Versus Deputy Director Of Income Tax

Case No.: ITA NO. 160 OF 2015

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 288

The Karnataka High Court has held that the assessee, Vodafone Idea, is not liable to deduct TDS on interconnectivity usage and bandwidth charges.

The bench of Justice P.S. Dinesh Kumar and Justice Ramachandra D. Huddar has observed that since the assessee was entitled to the benefits under the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA), it was not liable to deduct tax at source.

Karnataka HC Refuses To Quash Criminal Case Against Company For Not Furnishing Statistical Data, Says It Impacts Nation's Economic Policy

Case Title: M/s Masturlal (Pvt) Ltd And Government of India

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.4639 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 289

The Karnataka High Court has rejected a petition filed by a company M/s Masturlal (PVT) Ltd seeking to quash the proceedings initiated against it under the provisions of the Collection of Statistics Act, 2008 for non-furnishing of statistical data, to the Government.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said, “Non-furnishing of data by a company, though may seem to be a trivial offence but in effect, snowballs into an indelible impact on the planning of the economic policies of a nation, as the development goals of a nation becomes stacks. Therefore, statistical data, inter alia, becomes the life blood of economic policy making of a nation.”

Karnataka Motor Vehicle Rules | Amount Of Security For Release Of Seized Vehicle Can't Be Fixed Randomly: High Court

Case Title: Mustafa s/o Maktumsab Rasoolanavar And The State of Karnataka

Case No: Criminal Revision Petition No. 100268 of 2023 (397-)

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 290

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that when asking for deposit of amount for release of seized vehicle to the interim custody of the owner under Rule 232-G of Karnataka Motor Vehicle Rules, the Court has to take into consideration the probable value of the vehicle and the amount of security cannot be randomly fixed without any basis.

Petitioner Mustafa Rasoolanava had approached the Court questioning the order of the trial court passed on the application made by him under section 457 CrPC for release of his tractor. The trial court had ordered him to deposit cash of Rs.5,00,000 in court towards security and also to execute an indemnity bond of the like amount, for interim custody of the tractor, which was seized in an offence registered with the Dharwad Rural Police station under Sections 279, 283, 338, 304(A) of IPC.

Second Stint Of Police Custody After Judicial Custody Of Accused Not Permissible: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Emmanuel Michael And Union of India

Case No: WP 17961/2021

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 291

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that an accused cannot be remanded to police custody a second time in the same case after the accused has been in judicial custody for a long time.

A Single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna partly allowed the petition filed by one Emmanuel Michael who is charged for offences under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act) and declared as illegal the grant of police custody by the special court, six months after he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody.

Media Has Social Responsibility To Maintain Peace, Using Words 'Taliban' 'Goonda' Mentality Per Se Intolerable: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Lok Shikshan Trust & Others And Davalsab S/O Malliksab Nadaf

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100541 OF 2020 (482-) C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100540 OF 2020 CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100542 OF 2020 CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100543 OF 2020

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 292

The Karnataka High Court has said that journalists, print and electronic media cater to the needs of the general public by publishing important news items and they owe a social responsibility to maintain peace and tranquillity.

A single judge bench of Justice V Srishananda sitting at Dharwad said publication of news items has wide implications on the society at large and therefore, reports carried out in the print and electronic media are required to be strictly in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Press Council of India. It added, “Using the words 'Taliban', 'Goonda', 'Pundatike' are per se intolerable and beyond the scope of the guidelines issued by the Press Council of India...Members of the print and electronic media are expected to carry news items in a most decent manner.”

Child Born In 'Batil' Marriage Is Illegitimate, Has No Right To Succession Of Father's Property: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Nabisab s/o. Huchchesab Agnnamani AND Hatelsab s/o Huchchedab Sannamani

Case No: REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1467 OF 2007

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 293

The Karnataka High Court has said that a son, born in 'Batil' marriage (void-ab-initio) under Mohammadan Law, is illegitimate and does not possess any right of succession under the law.

A single judge bench of Justice V Srishananda allowed the appeal filed by one Nabisab Agnnamani (original plaintiff) and set aside the order of the first appellate court which granted half share of ancestral property to Hatelsab Sannamani (original defendant), holding him to be a legitimate son born to Fakiramma through Huchchesab who is the father of the plaintiff.

Karnataka High Court Directs DGP To Issue SOP To All SHOs For Compliance Of Lalitha Kumari Judgment On Registration Of FIR

Case Title: Vittal And The PSI of Bableshwar Police Station

Case No: Writ Petition No. 201668/2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 294

The Karnataka High Court has directed the Director General of Police (DGP) to issue necessary circular/SOP to all (police) Station House Officers in respect of the directions issued in Lalita Kumari's case, regarding registration of FIRs when a cognizable offence is made out in the complaint and instruct them to follow it scrupulously.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj sitting at Kalaburagi gave the direction while allowing the petition filed by one Vittal. He had approached the court stating that a complaint made by him on November 18, 2022 against certain persons has not been registered as a FIR by the respondent-police and no action has been taken thereon.

Centre Agrees In Karnataka High Court To Consider Representation Seeking Enquiry On 'Havana Syndrome' In India

Case Title: A Amarnath Chagu And Union of India

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 22221 OF 2021

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 295

The Union Government has informed the Karnataka High Court that it would look into the representation made to it for conducting an enquiry on possibility of 'Havana Syndrome' in India.

A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit disposed of the petition filed by one A Amarnath Chagu and directed the Union Government to consider his representation in three months.

Havana Syndrome is a mysterious neurological illness that is said to have struck American diplomats and spies in many parts of the world. Many US officials and their family members have reported symptoms of the illness, which include migraines, nausea, memory lapses, and dizziness. American officials deputed at the US embassy in Cuba first reported the symptoms in 2016

ATM Management Service To Banks Are Pure Services, No VAT Payable: Karnataka High Court Quashes Re-assessment

Case Title: FIS Payment Solutions And Services India Private Limited Versus The State Of Karnataka

Case No.: Writ Petition No. 9550 Of 2020 (T-RES)

Citation; 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 296

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the re-assessment and held that ATM management services to banks are pure services and will not attract Value Added Tax (VAT).

The bench of Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar has observed that the transaction is a pure service transaction, not entailing any transfer of property or effective control of the goods to the recipient. The various terms of the Agreements with the Banks disclose that the only intent of the contract is the provision of ATM management services, for which the petitioners deploy ATMs and other assets at various sites across India. The petitioners use the ATMs and other assets merely as a means for providing ATM management services to banks.

Karnataka High Court Criticizes Misuse Of SC/ST Prevention Of Atrocities Act, Quashes Criminal Case Over Property Dispute

Case Title: Rasik Lal Patel & ANR AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: Criminal Petition no.5497 of 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 297

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the prosecution initiated against two persons under provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, registered by the complainant immediately after the police filed a chargesheet against him on the complaint made by the petitioners, for house trespass and continuous harassment.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna while allowing the petition filed by Rasik Lal Patel and another said, “This case would form a classic illustration of misuse of the provisions of the Act and the penal provisions under the IPC. It is such cases which clog the criminal justice system and consume considerable time of the Courts, be it the Magistrates Court, Court of Session or this Court, while genuine cases where litigants have actually suffered would be waiting in the pipeline.”

SBI Is State Instrumentality, Writ Petition Maintainable Even In Disputes Pertaining To Contract For Loan Transaction: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: M/s Legal Property & ANR And Chief Manager, State Bank of India & ANR

Case No: WP 11203/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 298

The Karnataka High Court recently set aside an endorsement issued by the State Bank of India to a partnership firm, stopping the release of loan amount which was sanctioned and partly disbursed.

While the bank resisted the writ petition stating the loan transaction was in the nature of a 'private contract', a single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit observed, “The respondent-bank being an instrumentality of the State under Article 12 of the Constitution, even in matters like this, writ remedy can be granted to the aggrieved...A banker who answers description of State under Article 12 of the Constitution cannot act like a private lender; its actions have to be animated with reason & justice, which factors are militantly absent in the impugned endorsement/notice. Therefore the same is liable to be invalidated.”

Wife Insulted, Moved Away From Husband Because Of His 'Dark Complexion': Karnataka High Court Dissolves Marriage On Ground Of Cruelty

Case Title: ABC And XYZ

Case NO: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8998 OF 2017

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 299

The Karnataka High Court has held that a wife insulting the husband on the premise that he is 'dark', moving away from his company for the same reason and levelling false allegations of illicit relationships as a cover up, would constitute cruelty.

A division bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Anant Ramanath Hegde thus allowed the appeal filed by the husband and set aside the family court order refusing divorce decree. It said, “The wife used to insult the husband on the premise that he is dark. And for the same reason has moved away from the company of the husband without any cause. And to cover up this aspect, has levelled false allegations of illicit relationships against the husband. These facts certainly will constitute cruelty.”

Karnataka High Court Directs Integration Of Police IT System With Road Accident Database, FSL, Insurance Depts

Case Title: The Divisional Manager United India Insurance Company Ltd And Ramu @ Ramesh S/O Yallappa & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.201961 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 300

The Karnataka High Court reiterated that Motor Vehicles Act being a beneficial legislation, the provisions thereof have to be given beneficial meaning and effect.

It held that benefit under the Act cannot be taken away on a technical aspect that too of limitation under Section 166(3) of the Act, which mandates that no claim petition can be entertained unless it is made within six months of the occurrence of the accident.

Order 39 CPC | Suppression Of Material Facts Detrimental To Grant Of Temporary Injunction: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Nanjamma & Others AND Rajamma & Others

Case No: M.F.A No 2172/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 301

The Karnataka High Court recently held that relief of temporary injunction under Order 39

Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) is a discretionary remedy which requires a careful balance between the need for interim relief and the ongoing legal proceedings.

Justice H.P Sandesh added that this discretion should not be exercised when material facts are suppressed before the Trial Court and that any false or misleading information in obtaining such interim relief can be detrimental to the integrity of the judicial process.

Class 1 Admissions: Karnataka High Court Refuses To Interfere With State's Policy Fixing '6 Years' As Eligibility Criteria

Case Title: ABC And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 11173/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 302

The Karnataka High Court has upheld the State government's decision fixing the admission age for class-I students in Government schools, aided and unaided schools from the academic year 2025-2026 as 6 years.

A single judge bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum dismissed a petition filed on behalf of a 4 year old toddler, represented through her father, seeking to quash the notification/order dated 26.07.2022.

S.397 CrPC | Revision Petition Before Sessions Court Against Order Passed By Magistrate U/S 143A NI Act Maintainable: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Sanjay P S And Abhishek M

Case No: Criminal Petition No: 5944/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 303

The Karnataka High Court has held that a revision petition preferred before the Sessions court under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging an order made by the Magistrate Court under Section 143A of the Negotiable Instruments Act, is maintainable.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said, “An order passed on an application filed under Section 143A of the Act, is not interlocutory order, but an intermediate order, as the application is filed, and the application is closed, under the said provision, determining the rights and liabilities of parties qua the application and revision petition before the Court of Sessions on the order passed by the learned Magistrate under Section 143A either allowing the application, or rejecting it, would be maintainable for the aggrieved party, be it the complainant or the accused to approach.”

[Maintenance] S.125 CrPC Doesn't Require Wife To Prove 'Sufficient Cause For Living Separately' From Husband: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Smt. Renuka & Ors. v Sri Venkatesh

Case No: RPFC No. 100033/2020

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 304

The Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench, has held that maintenance proceedings under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (“Cr.P.C”) do not require proof regarding sufficient cause for living separately.

“It is clear from a clean reading of Section 125 of Cr.P.C, that the proceedings are summary in nature and it is sufficient if negligence or refusal on the part of the husband in providing maintenance to the wife is demonstrated. The proceedings do not contemplate the proof regarding sufficient cause for living separately”, the Court held.

Electricity Act | Minimum Sentence Under S.135 Can't Be Less Than Three Times The Financial Gain: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: State By PI MESCON v B Usman Beary

Case No: Criminal Appeal 1128/2011

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 305

The Karnataka High Court has enhanced the fine imposed on a convict from Rs. 5,000/- to Rs. 1,08,189/- for theft of electricity, while observing that the minimum sentence under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 for the first conviction cannot be less than three times the financial gain.

The Bench comprising Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar thus allowed an appeal preferred by the State Government praying to enhance the fine amount imposed by the Special Court against an Accused for theft of electricity.

S.120 Evidence Act | Wife Competent To Depose On Behalf Of Plaintiff Even In Absence Of Power Of Attorney: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Shashikala & Others And Laxman Yadu Kadam and Others

Case No: REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1832 OF 2005

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 306

The Karnataka High Court has said the wife of a plaintiff, even in the absence of power of attorney issued to her, is competent enough to depose on behalf of the original plaintiff in a civil suit.

A single judge bench of Justice V Srishananda, sitting at Dharwad, recently dismissed an appeal filed by Shashikala and others challenging an order passed by the First appellate court which reversed the trial court order dismissing the suit filed by Laxman Yadu Kadam, seeking a declaration of right over the disputed property and for restraining the defendants from disturbing the actual possession and lawful wahivat of the plaintiffs.

No Special Treatment For Lawyers And Judges In Loan Recovery: Karnataka HC Dismisses Senior Advocate's Plea Against 'Coerced Proceedings'

Case Title: N Ravindranath Kamath And Sri Subramanyeshwara Cooperative Bank Limited & others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 3791 OF 2021 (GM-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 1 OF 2023.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 307

The Karnataka High Court recently dismissed a petition filed by Senior Advocate N Ravindranath Kamath, challenging the 'coercive' loan recovery proceedings instituted against him under the SARFAESI Act by the Sri Subramanyeshwara Cooperative Bank Limited for being a chronic loan defaulter.

Justice Krishna S Dixit said, “A borrower is a borrower, whether he is a practising lawyer or a sitting Judge. Loan laws do not provide for favourable treatment to them differential qua other borrowers, when they become chronic defaulters. An argument to the contrary offends equality/parity in matters of loan recovery and therefore, cannot be countenanced.”

Dark Web | Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash 'Light Combat Aircraft' Data Theft Case Against 27-Yr-Old Aerospace Engineer

Case Title: SIVA RAMA KRISHNA And MR.SASI NARKIS BABU V & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.1985 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 308

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings initiated against 27-year-old, who is accused of leaking the data of the Light Combat Aircraft developed under the Tejas programme by Aeronautical Development Agency, on the dark web for enriching himself.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed the petition filed by Siva Rama Krishna Chennuboina seeking to quash proceedings initiated in 2021 against him under sections 66, 66(F), 84(C) of the Information Technology Act, 2008 and Section 380 of the IPC.

Haj | Chairman's Tenure Cannot Be Extended Beyond Tenure Of Committee: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Raufuddin Kacheriwalay & Others And State of Karnataka & others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.648 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 309

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by the Chairman and Members of the State Haj Committee to extend the tenure of the Chairman and the Committee, beyond three years from the date of election, as the appointment of the Chairman was notified at a belated stage, post directions from the High Court.

A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed the petition filed by Raufuddin Kacheriwalay and others and said, "The office of Chairman ordinarily has a prescribed tenure and such tenure begins from the day one of the Committee regardless of its incumbency. Section 21(1) mandates the government to convene the maiden meeting of the Committee within 45 days of its formation for electing one of its members as the Chairman. If delay is brooked in conducting such a meeting that does not elongate the tenure of the electee as the Chairman. In other words, the tenure of the Chairman is coterminous with that of his membership and once he ceases to be a member by resignation, removal or expiry of his membership, his Chairmanship also stands determined."

Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash Abetment Of Suicide Case Against Three For Allegedly Teasing Colleague Over Sexual Orientation

Case Title: Malathy S B & Others AND State of Karnataka

Case No: WP 11745/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 310

The Karnataka High Court recently refused to quash criminal proceedings initiated against three employees of Lifestyle International Private Limited, accused of teasing their colleague on his sexual orientation, which is alleged to have caused him to commit suicide.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed the petition filed by Malathy S B, Deputy General Manager in Marketing; Kumar Suraj, Vice-President in Human Resources and Nitish Kumar, Assistant Manager in Marketing, who are charged under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

Objection To Civil Suit In View Of Arbitration Clause To Be Raised Before Court Of First Instance: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Nova Medical Centers Pvt Ltd And Sowmya & ANR

Case No: RFA 937/2016

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 311

The Karnataka High Court has set aside a trial court order dismissing a suit filed by Nova Medical Centers Pvt Ltd. on the premise that the dispute is arbitrable. Court noted that the defendant had failed to raise an objection as to jurisdiction of the Civil Court.

A single judge bench of Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde observed,“It is a well-settled principle of law that the objection to entertain the suit based on the arbitration Clause is to be raised before the Court at the first appearance and not later.”

"Fading Away Of Intimacy" After 6 Yrs Of Consensual Sex Not Rape: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Girinath B And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.6863 OF 2022 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION No.6485 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 312

“Fading away of the intimacy after six years of consensual acts of sexual intercourse cannot mean that it would become ingredients of Section 375 [Rape] of the IPC,” the Karnataka High Court observed recently.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna thus quashed a rape case registered by a woman against her live-in partner whom she had befriended on Facebook. It added, “They were consensual acts from day one and consensual acts till 27-12-2019. The period is six long years. Therefore, it cannot but be construed that it would not be a rape for it to become punishable under Section 376 of the IPC. If further proceedings are permitted to continue as observed hereinabove, it would run foul of a plethora of judgments rendered by the Apex Court on the issue.”

At Stage Of Preliminary Decree, Purchaser Of Undivided Interest Has No Say In A Partition Suit: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Vinayak Metrani And Gadigevva @ Neelavva & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 106032 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 313

The Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench, has held that the purchaser of an undivided interest, who has no locus in a partition suit, has no say at the stage of preliminary decree. The Court was adjudicating a writ petition, wherein the purchaser of an undivided interest had challenged the order of Civil Court passed in a partition suit allowing amendment to the same.

The bench comprising Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum observed, “It is quite strange to know that petitioner who is purchaser of undivided interest who has no locus in a partition suit has ventured in challenging the order passed on amendment application. While drawing a preliminary decree, a stranger-purchaser has no say in the suit. Merely because, he is impleaded in the suit, will not give a right to him to dictate as to how the suit has to be proceeded with. His rights, if any, in an undivided interest has to be worked out in final decree proceedings.”

[Rent Control] Parties' Legal Rights Fixed At Suit Initiation, Subsequent Events Don't Affect Jurisdiction: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Krishnaprasad A AND L Doreswamy

Case No: HOUSE RENT REV. PETITION NO.10/2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 314

The Karnataka High Court recently reiterated that the legal rights of parties become established as of the date the legal action is initiated, such as filing a suit and that subsequent events that occur after the initiation of legal proceedings do not affect the jurisdiction of the court.

Justice H P Sandesh added that events such as the tenant approaching the Rent Controller to fix a fair rent, cannot retroactively create rights that affect the court's jurisdiction. “It is well settled principle that right of parties crystallizes to the date of institution of the suit...the date of filing of the petition is the relevant date to consider the jurisdiction and not subsequent any conduct will not oust the jurisdiction."

Diabetes Is 'Manageable', Not Excuse To Avoid Payment Of Maintenance To Wife & Children: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Ananth Kumar K G And Yogita S @ Yogitha Ananth Kumar

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 12802 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 315

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed the petition filed by one Ananth Kumar KG questioning the order of family court directing him to pay Rs 10,000 as monthly maintenance to his estranged wife.

A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit rejected the contention of the petitioner that he has been suffering from diabetes and related ailments, thus he is not able to pay monthly maintenance amount for the upkeep of his minor child for the last three years. The bench said, “A large section of people all over the world suffer from such ailments and with the advancement of medical science, all that is manageable. It is not the case of the petitioner that the same are not manageable with proper medical care.”

Karnataka High Court Quashes 'Reckless, Vague' Case Against BJP Chief JP Nadda For 'Wooing' Voters

Case Title: Jagath Prakash Nadda And State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: Criminal Petition no. 5488 of 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 316

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against National President of Bharatiya Janata Party and a former Union Minister, Jagath Prakash Nadda for allegedly wooing and threatening voters during an election rally held in May ahead of Assembly elections.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna found the FIR under Section 171-F of IPC was 'recklessly' registered against Nadda on the basis of a 'loosely laid offence' in a 'vague complaint'.

Private Association Of Apartment Owners Not 'State' U/Article 12: Karnataka HC Dismisses Writ Plea Against 'Facilitation Charge' For Tenancy

Case Title: M J MAthew & others And Prestige St. Johns Wood Apartment Owners Association & ANR

Case No: WP 2881/2016

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 317

The Karnataka High Court recently refused to entertain a writ petition moved by certain flat owners questioning the amendment of bye laws of the Apartment Owners' Association which paved way for levy of 'Facilitation Charge' from owners who had let out their apartments on lease, licence, tenancy or otherwise.

A single judge bench of Justice R Nataraj dismissed the petition filed by questioning the action of the Prestige St Johns Wood Apartment Owners Association which is constituted under the Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act, 1972.

'Proximate Incident' Necessary For Passing Externment Order: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Mahantayya And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No. 104804/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 318

The Karnataka High Court has quashed an externment order passed by the authorities against one Mahantayya, who was externed from Bailhongal Subdivision to Bagalkot for a period of three months.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna sitting at Dharwad said, “Provisions of law which empower externment of a person would undoubtedly mean that there should be minimum proximity or necessity for passing an order of externment. There is no proximate incident that is narrated in the impugned order. Without any foundation the order projects the

petitioner as a bane to the society or the surrounding area.”

Plea To Include Advocates' Parents As Dependents For Medical Insurance Withdrawn From Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Ramesh Naik L And Karnataka State Bar Council and Ors.

Case No: WP (FR) NO.14863/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 319

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday permitted withdrawal of a public interest litigation filed by Advocate Ramesh Naik L, seeking a direction to the Karnataka State Bar Council (KSBC) and the Bar Council of India (BCI) to take appropriate action to include Parents of Advocates as dependents in the model form provided by the State Bar Council to provide Medical insurance, Term insurance for Advocates.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice M G S Kamal said, “After arguing for sometime the party in person seeks leave to withdraw the PIL with liberty to file a proper and comprehensive PIL. Allowed to withdraw with liberty as prayed for.”

Onus On Plaintiff To Prove Possession Of Property In Suit For Bare Injunction: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Chandra & Others AND G. Krishnappa.

Case NO: WRIT PETITION NO. 19003 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 320

The Karnataka High Court recently held that in a suit for bare injunction, it is for the person who approaches the Court to prove his lawful possession over the suit schedule property.

Justice S G Pandit added that in such cases, the defendant is not required to move an application to prove the authenticity of the documents produced by the plaintiff during the course of evidence. "In a suit for bare injunction, it is for the person who approaches the Court to prove his lawful possession... In the course of trial admittedly the respondent/plaintiff has marked exhibits P11 to P23, documents said to have been issued by the BBMP or the Grama Panchayath of Tanisandra. Therefore, it is for the plaintiff to prove the documents in accordance with law and it is for the Trial Court, at the time of final disposal, to evaluate and to appreciate the documents and its genuineness."

Medical Board Can Only Decide Extent Of Candidate's Disability, Not Their Eligibility For A Course: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Dr Pooja S N v Union of India & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 16631 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 321

The Karnataka High Court has recently held that the Medical Board as an expert body is only authorised to determine the extent of a candidate's disability, and cannot draw a conclusion about whether a candidate would be eligible to pursue a medical course.

A division bench of Justice G Narendar and Justice Vijaykumar A Patil on going through the records added that the Medical Board is not the selecting authority to certify the eligibility of a candidate. “The eligibility of a candidate is to be concluded by the respondents and it certainly is not within the domain of the Medical Board. Being an expert body it was merely required to assess and certify the extent of disability, in our opinion the conclusion drawn by the board is wholly unsustainable being illegal and as the board is not the selecting authority the eligibility of a candidate cannot be certified by the board.”

Article 20 | No Conviction U/S 376(3) IPC For Rape Of Woman Under 16 Yrs Age Committed Prior To 2018 Amendment: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Abdul Khadar @ Rafiq And State of Karnataka & ANR.

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 150 OF 2020

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 322

The Karnataka High Court has upheld the conviction handed down to a man for raping his minor step daughter, but modified the sentence of 20 years imposed on him by the trial court to 10 years imprisonment.

A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan partly allowed the appeal filed by 45 years old Abdul Khadar @ Rafiq, who was convicted to 20 years under section 376 (3) of the Indian Penal Code, for an offence committed in 2015.

How Is Offering Prayers A Threat? Karnataka High Court Quashes PIL Challenging Use Of Residential Premises As Prayer Hall

Case Title: Sam P Philip & Others v State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WP 8389/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 323

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a PIL filed by residents of HBR Layout in Bengaluru, who opposed the use of a residential property as a prayer hall.

During the hearing, a division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice M G S Kamal took strong exception to the oral submission made by the counsel for the petitioner that 'offering prayers was a risk'.

“We will not accept this. Offering a prayer is not a risk. Mr Counsel, you probably made this statement under an erroneous impression, please think twice before making a statement. We are not permitting such statements. This is something to which we have strong objections, you can't make a statement so casually. You are a lawyer, please don't make such statements, this is not done. You have no right to make such sweeping statements. One can only say that there is some violation of rules, please ask the authorities. How can you say someone offering prayer is a threatening activity?”

Virtual Cross Examination Doesn't Prejudice Accused: Karnataka HC Refuses To Order Physical Presence Of Judge Appearing As Witness In Criminal Case

Case Title: Mahadev And State of Karnataka

Case No: Criminal Petition No 200953/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 324

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by an accused seeking physical presence of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Vijayapura (now posted in Bengaluru) for cross examination as a witness in his case, instead of via video conferencing. A single judge bench of Justice Venkatesh Naik T. sitting at Kalaburagi said recording of evidence through video conferencing is permissible in view of proviso to Section 275(1) of CrPC, as amended in 2008.

Permanent FCRA Registration Doesn't Guarantee Foreign Fund Crediting Without Ministry's Clearance: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: MANSA–Centre for Development and Social Action v. Managing Director, Development Credit Bank & Others.

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.6111/2014

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 325

The Karnataka High Court recently ruled that permanent registration under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) did not endow an unequivocal right to credit foreign funds into their designated savings account without authorisation from the Ministry of Home Affairs.

Justice K S Hemalekha thus dismissed a petition filed by MANSA seeking a direction to the Development Credit Bank (DCB) to release frozen funds received from a foreign donor Dan Church Aid which has been put under the 'prior approval category' by the Ministry of Home Affairs.

Criminal Intimidation | Mere Expression Of Words Without Intention Insufficient To Attract Section 506 IPC: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Sugurappa @ Sugurayya Swami v. The State Of Karnataka

Case NO: Criminal Petition No.201248 of 2021

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 326

The Karnataka High Court has held that mere expression of words without any intention to cause alarm to the complainant or to make him to do or omit to do any act, is not sufficient to bring the act of the accused within the definition of criminal intimidation, as prescribed under section 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

A Single judge bench of Justice Venkatesh Naik T thus quashed a trial court order taking cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 448, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal, 1860 against the accused.

After 30 Yrs In Jail, Karnataka HC Commutes Sentence Of 70-Yrs-Old Death Row Convict, Criticizes Unexplained Delay In Deciding Mercy Petition

Case Title: Saibanna s/o Ningappa Natikar AND The Union of India & Others

Case No: Writ Petition no. 3297 of 2013

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 327

The Karnataka High Court has set aside the death penalty imposed on a 70-year-old murder convict and commuted it to life imprisonment, after he spent 30 years behind bars and of which almost two decades he spent in solitary confinement.

A division bench of Justice G Narendar and Justice C M Poonacha allowed the writ petition filed by Saibanna Ningappa Natikar on two grounds—in-ordinate delay of 7 years and eight months in deciding his mercy petition and that he was made to suffer a singular cell confinement/solitary confinement without the sanction of law.

Railway Claims Tribunal Cannot Punish Any Person For Non-Payment Of Award Passed By It: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: The Union of India v. Malini & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 12947 OF 2017

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 328

The Karnataka High Court has held that the Railway Claims Tribunal has no power to punish any person for disobeying its orders, granting compensation to claimants.

A single judge bench of Justice R Nataraj allowed the petition filed by the Union of India and quashed a 2017 order passed by the Tribunal, issuing show cause notice to the General Manager, South Western Railway, as to why action should not be initiated against him for non-compliance of the order of the Tribunal.

Hijab Ban Row: Karnataka High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against Two Youth Accused Of Making Graffiti On Govt School Wall

Case Title: Muzammil & ANR v. State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101193 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 329

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a criminal case registered against two youth accused of writing “Hijab is our dignity” with black paint on the walls of a Government Girls High School, near CMC Hosapete, Vijayanagara.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna sitting at Dharwad allowed the petition filed by Muzammil (23) and Mohammad Jamaul (25), and quashed the proceedings initiated against them under Section 3 of the Karnataka Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1981.

Inadvertence No Reason To Deny Opportunity To Candidate Otherwise Entitled: Karnataka HC Permits NEET-PG Aspirant To Correct Caste & Avail Quota

Case Title: Dr Lakhsmi P Gowda AND National Board of Examinations In Medical Sciences & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 12859/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 330

The Karnataka High Court has come to the aid of a 23 years old student, who while filling-up the online registration application for National Eligibility Cum Entrance Test-PG (NEET-PG), inadvertently failed to choose her caste under the quota reserved for OBC category.

A division bench of Justice G Narendar and Justice Vijaykumar A Patil allowed the petition filed by Dr. Lakshmi P Gowda and directed the National Board of Examinations In Medical Sciences to permit her to correct the entry in Column No.7 of the application/scorecard and amend it to read from General to OBC.

Swachh Bharat Mission: Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash Case For Alleged Misappropriation Of About 70L Sanctioned For Public Toilets

Case Title: Hampamma & Others And State Through Lingasugur P.S

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200652/2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 331

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by seven persons accused of misappropriating funds sanctioned in respect of 'Swachh Bharat Mission Project' for construction of toilets within the limits of Honnalli, Gudadanal and Yaradona Villages between July 2016 and May 2017.

A single bench of Justice Venkatesh Naik T, sitting at Kalaburagi dismissed the petition filed by Hampamma and others who are charged for offences punishable under sections 420, 409, 201, of the Indian Penal Code. It said, “On perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the petitioners without constructing toilets misappropriated the funds to the tune of Rs.68.19 lakhs sanctioned by the Government under 'Swachh Bharat Mission'. Admittedly, disputed question of fact cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., at this stage, only prima facie case is to be seen.”

Employee Can Access Colleague's Service Records Under RTI Act To Pursue Service Litigation : Karnataka High Court

Case Title: A S MALLIKARJUNASWAMY, AND STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER & others.

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 23695 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 332

The Karnataka High Court has set aside an order passed by the State Information Commissioner rejecting an application filed by a college professor seeking service record details of his colleague.

A single bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit allowed the petition filed by A S Mallikarjunaswamy and set aside the of Commission whereby his RTI application had been negatived quoting the provisions of Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Not Prejudicial To Either Local Or Non Local Candidates: Karnataka High Court Upholds Recruitment Circular With Reservations U/Art 371J

Case Title: Naveen Kumar H N & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 4979 OF 2023 (S-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 6588 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 333

The Karnataka High Court has upheld the government circular dated 01.02.2023 which provides clarification on the application of reservations under Article 371J of the Constitution for candidates from the Kalyana Karnataka Region, formerly known as the Hyderabad-Karnataka region.

Justice N S Sanjay Gowda highlighted that the core objective of introducing special provisions in the Hyderabad-Karnataka region was to acknowledge its underdevelopment and offer incentives for education and employment. "...the very objective of amending the Constitution and making special provisions in respect of the Hyderabad-Karnataka region was to, firstly, acknowledge the fact that the Hyderabad-Karnataka region was not as well developed as the other parts of Karnataka and secondly, to make provisions to ensure that it was treated differently and grant incentives to the persons hailing from the region in the matter of providing education and employment (including by promotion to persons hailing from the region) so as to ensure that the Hyderabad-Karnataka region comes out of its backwardness. Thus, any orders made in exercise of the powers under Article 371J would have to be examined and considered keeping in mind this underlying objective."

Market Value Of Land Acquired Under 1894 Act Determined As Per Right To Fair Compensation Act Where Award Passed After Its Enforcement: Karnataka HC

Case Title: M/s Deco Equipments Pvt Ltd AND The State of Karnataka & others.

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.33180 OF 2016

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 334

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that the market value of land acquired under section 4(1) the Land Acquisition Act 1894, is to be determined as per Section 26 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013, if the award is passed after the 2013 Act came into force.

A single bench of S Sunil Dutt Yadav allowed the petition filed by M/s Deco Equipments Pvt Ltd and quashed the Award dated 20.01.2016 passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, Mysore District.

Partition Suit After 90 Years Not Maintainable If Possession Not Delivered As Per Preliminary & Final Decrees: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: P Ramaprasad And Thyagaraj R & Others

Case No: CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.70/2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 335

The Karnataka High Court has held that filing a suit for property partition after a lapse of 90 years of passing a final decree is not maintainable if the possession has not been delivered as per the preliminary and final decrees.

Justice H P Sandesh added that the same ought to have been enforced by filing an execution petition within the period of limitation.

"Having referred to Section 47 of CPC, it is clear that when there was a decree between the parties and relating to the execution, discharge of satisfaction of the decree, shall be determined by the Court executing the decree and not by a separate suit. In the case on hand, already there was a decree in respect of the Munireddy's share and pleading of the plaintiff also clear that share has been determined and final decree also was drawn on 14.5.1928 and instead of executing the final decree by filing execution petition, a separate suit is filed before the Court and hence, it is clear that it is nothing but clever drafting of the plaint while filing the suit for the relief of seeking once again for partition."

Executive Guidelines Cannot Supersede Works Of Defence Act For Building Permissions Around Military Establishments: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Jambo Plastics Pvt. Ltd & Others AND Chief Quality Assurance Establishment & Others.

Case No: Writ Petition No.40510 OF 2017

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 336

The Karnataka High Court has held that authorities cannot rely on executive guidelines for the issue of NOC for regulating building constructions around Defence establishments, as long as the Works of Defence Act, 1903 is in operation.

A single bench of Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav allowed the petition filed by Jambo Plastics Pvt Ltd and directed BBMP to consider sanctioning the former's plan, which is kept in abeyance, without insisting for adherence to the Guidelines dated 21-10-2016. It said, “Executive Guidelines have no place when the field is occupied by Legislation, the Guidelines cannot be relied upon by the Union Government to impose restrictions as long as the Works of Defence Act, 1903 is in operation and is not amended."

Hubli-Ankola Railway Line: South-Western Railway Authority To Prepare Fresh Proposal In Consultation With Wildlife Institute

Case Title: Project Vruksha Foundation v State Board For Wildlife (SBWL) Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 8067 OF 2020 (GM-RES-PIL) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 8181 OF 2020 (GM-RES-PIL) & WRIT PETITION NO. 12132 OF 2020 (GM-RES-PIL

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 337

The South-Western Railway has submitted an affidavit before the Karnataka High Court stating that it will submit a revised proposal seeking permission for laying of Hubli-Ankola Railway Line Project after mitigating the gaps and deficiencies in the earlier proposal as is pointed out by the National Board for Wildlife.

The affidavit filed by the Deputy Chief Engineer states, “South Western Railways (SWR), Hubli, shall follow the directions issued by NBWL and shall prepare a mitigation plan for the Hubli-Ankola Railway Line project, in consultation with Wildlife Institute of India (WII), Dehradun and follow any other directives of NBWL and MOEF & CC, and shall commence the work only after getting all the clearances/approvals as required under law."

Keeping Investigations Against Public Servants Pending Affect Their Rights: Karnataka High Court Asks Lokayukta To "Set Its House In Order"

Case Title: Dr Kallappa Mahadevappa Hosmani AND The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Karnataka Lokayukta.

Case No: Criminal Petition No. 103443 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 338

The Karnataka High Court has asked the Karnataka Lokayukta to "set its house in order" by directing completion of investigation registered against public servants under the Prevention of Corruption Act, within a time frame.

A single bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna sitting at Dharwad said, “This Court has come across several cases where investigation has gone on for ages and no final report was filed. It, therefore, speaks volumes of lackadaisical attitude on the part of the prosecution/ Lokayukta.”

Karnataka High Court Disqualifies JD(S) MP Prajwal Revanna Citing Irregularities In Election Affidavit

Case Title: A MANJU And PRAJWAL REVANNA @ PRAJWAL R.

Case No: EP 1/2019 C/W EP 2/2019.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 339

The Karnataka High Court on Friday declared the election of MP Prajwal Revanna of the Janatha Dal Secular Party as null and void for filing false information in his election affidavit.

Justice K Natarajan while pronouncing the order said, “Both the Election petitions are allowed in part. The election of returned candidate respondent no. 1 alias Prajwal R, Member of the Parliament, having being declared as returned candidate dated 23-05-2019, is hereby declared as null and void.”

Can't Let Convict's "Societal Roots" Dry Up During Imprisonment: Karnataka High Court Releases Man On Furlough To Attend Daughter's Nikah

Case Title: Abdul Rehman And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 18712 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 340

Observing that “ordinarily every Muslim Marriage involves certain rituals that are done with the participation of the parents,” the Karnataka High Court granted furlogh leave to a convict Abdul Rehman, to attend his daughters nikah which was scheduled yesterday.

Bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit remarked that although sporadically, a convict has to keep in contact with the civil society so that his societal roots do not dry up when he languishes in the jail;. "Otherwise, when he returns from the prison after completing the term of sentence, he may be a total stranger and life may prove hard to him; this is not a happy thing to happen in a Welfare State.”

Preventive Detention Can Be Quashed If Authority Fails To Provide Documents Relied Upon In Language Known To Detenu: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Shrenika And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 201957/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (kar) 341

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a detention order passed under the Karnataka Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act 1985 (Goonda Act) on the ground that authorities failed to provide to detenu, the documents relied on by them, in a language known to the detenue.

A Division bench of Justice Mohammad Nawaz and Justice Rajesh Rai K sitting at Kalaburagi thus ordered immediate release of Huchappa @ Dhanaraj Kalebag. It said, “It is an admitted fact that the detenue has studied upto 3rd standard and does not know English language, as such it is the bounden duty of the detaining authority to provide the translated copies of those documents. Nevertheless, the law contemplates that in order to give an effective representation to the Government and before the Advisory Board, such an opportunity has to be provided to the detenue by the detaining authority. In the case on hand, even the detaining authority has failed to make known the grounds of detention to the detenue within the specified period of 21 days as contemplated under Section 3(3) of the Goonda Act.”

DV Act | Daughters Entitled To Maintenance Only Till They Attain Majority, Not Till Marriage: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: XYZ And ABC

Case No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.795 OF 2015 C/W CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.1031 OF 2015

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 342

The Karnataka High Court has clarified that under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, a father is to pay maintenance amount to his daughters only till they attain majority and maintenance cannot be ordered to be paid till their marriage.

Justice Rajendra Badamikar added that upon attaining majority if the daughters are not able to maintain themselves, they can seek maintenance under provisions of the Hindu Adoption Act. “In the instant case, admittedly, the major daughters are not parties and they have not sought any maintenance independently. They have got remedy under the provisions of Hindu Adoption Act to seek the maintenance on attaining majority in case they are unable to maintain themselves. Hence, under the provisions of Domestic Violence Act, question of awarding maintenance till marriage of the daughters does not arise at all and the maintenance can be granted till the attainment of age of majority by the child.”

Unexplained Delay In Filing Complaint Alleging Grave Offences U/S 354A IPC Fatal To Prosecution: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Usman Makandar alias Usmanshah And State of Karnataka. Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 343

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100989 OF 2020

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a prosecution initiated by a woman alleging offences under Section 354A of IPC (sexual harassment) for having filed the complaint three years after the alleged incident took place.

Justice M Nagaprasanna sitting at Dharwad allowed the petition and quashed the prosecution under sections 354A, 354B & 504 of the Indian Penal Code observing that the delay in registering the crime in the peculiar facts of this case was fatal.

Karnataka HC Permits NLSIU To Seek Quick Disposal Of Transgender Aspirant's Plea For Reservation, Provisional Admission To Continue

Case Title: NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY AND MUGIL ANBU VASANTHA & Others

Case No: WA 1025/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 344

The Karnataka High Court on Monday disposed of an appeal filed by the National Law School of India University (NLSIU) challenging a single bench order directing it to grant provisional admission to a transgender person in the 3-year LLB course for the academic year 2023-24, if found eligible.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit said, “As the issue involved assumes importance being an issue relating to the admission qua reservation to transgender persons, in our opinion it will be in the interest of justice and in the fitness of things that the parties are relegated to single judge to make a request to single judge for hearing petition expeditiously for final disposal.”

'A Hexagenerian Can't Be Left Tongue-Tied': Karnataka HC Allows Retd Employee To Engage Lawyer To Defend Him In Dept Enquiry Despite Prohibitory Rule

Case Title: T Ramesh Babu And The Inquiry Authority & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 101897/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 345

The Karnataka High Court recently set aside an order passed by the Inquiry Authority of United India Insurance Company declining to accede to the request of a former employee for engaging the services of a legal practitioner to defend him in the departmental enquiry.

Justice M Nagaprasanna sitting at Dharwad bench held that the circumstances of the petitioner, particularly his age and hearing disability, outweighed the rules that prohibit engaging the services of an advocate in department enquiries.

"Conscious Decision", Will Concentrate On Career: Karnataka High Court Waives 1-Yr Cooling Off Period For Mutual Divorce Under Special Marriage Act

Case Title: XYZ & ANR AND NIL

Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3125 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 346

The Karnataka High Court has allowed a petition filed by an estranged couple and waived off the statutory cooling period of one year before deciding on the petition for divorce by mutual consent, under the Special Marriage Act.

A division bench of Justice G Narendar and Justice Vijaykumar A Patil allowed the petition filed by the couple and set aside the order of the family court which dismissed their application under Section 28(2) of the Act. The bench said, “The parties to the proceedings are between the age group of 32 to 37 years and they have specifically averred that they intend to concentrate on their career and decided to move on in their respective life. The said decision of the appellants is a conscious decision and the parties are quite mature about the consequences of the said decision. In the facts and circumstances narrated above, this Court is of the considered view that the possibilities of reconciliation between the appellants are bleak.”

Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash Recovery Order Against Former MLA Chikkanna Who Missed Govt-Funded Legal Study Tour In 2009

Case Title: Chikkanna And Karnataka Legislative Assembly Secretariat & Others

Case NO: WRIT PETITION NO. 39016 OF 2011

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 347

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash an order of the State Legislative Assembly Secretariat seeking to recover a sum of about Rs. 4 lakh from former legislator Chikkanna who missed a government-funded legal study tour back in 2009.

A single bench of Justice R Nataraj observed,"The tour was scheduled on 23.08.2009 but the request to cancel the tour was made by the petitioner on which was very close to the date of departure. Therefore, the tour operator cannot be expected to refund the tour cost as the operator would have already spent corresponding amounts on the airfare, accommodation etc. In that view of the matter, the petitioner cannot now contend that he was unable to travel due to reasons beyond his control and also contend that he was not liable to refund a sum of Rs.3,89,800/-."

6 Yrs After Man Was Washed Away While Working In Stormwater Drain, Karnataka High Court Orders BBMP To Issue His Death Certificate To Wife

Case Title: Mrs Saraswathi S P And The Commissioner & Others

Case NO: Writ Petition No. 26850 OF 2018

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 348

The Karnataka High Court has come to the aid of a woman by directing the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) to issue the death certificate of her husband, an excavator operator with BBMP who was washed away in heavy rain while working in a stormwater drain in 2017.

A single bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj allowed the petition filed by Mrs Saraswathi S P and directed the Corporation to issue the death certificate within 30 days.

The bench rejected the contention of the civic body that if the husband of the petitioner were to return alive at a later point of time, the death certificate would amount to a false death certificate. It remarked, “The corporation is clutching at straws to try and justify its inaction. If at all the husband of the petitioner were to return alive, the respondent can always cancel the death certificate. Merely because there is such an apprehension, a living person cannot be deprived of the benefit of a death certificate of a person who is dead.”

'Where Is The Prohibition?': Karnataka High Court Dismisses Plea Against Appointment Of Political Secretaries, Media Advisor To CM Siddaramiah

Case Title: Umapathi S AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WP 15257/2023.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 349

The Karnataka High Court today dismissed a Public Interest Litigation challenging the appointment of Political Secretaries and Media Advisor to Chief Minister Siddaramiah.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed the petition filed by Advocate Umapathi S and said, “For reasons to be recorded separately, the petition is dismissed.” Detailed order to follow.

The petitioner had challenged the appointments of Congress MLCs Dr K. Govindraj and Nazeer Ahmed as Political Secretaries, Sunil Kunagol as Chief Advisor and journalist KV Prabhakar as the Media Advisor to the Chief Minister.

No Further Recovery Of Demand Can Be Made When A Fresh Assessment Is Barred: Karnataka High Court Directs Rs.87 Crore Refund To United Spirits

Case Title: United Spirits Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax

Case No.: Writ Petition No. 13953 Of 2020

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 350

The Karnataka High Court has held that no further demand can be made for recovery of the balance amount since a fresh assessment is barred. In other words, the tax paid by the assessee must be accepted as it is, and in the event of the tax paid being in excess of the tax liability duly computed on the basis of the return furnished and the rates applicable, the excess shall be refunded to the assessee.

The bench of Justice B. M. Shyam Prasad, while quashing the demand notice issued in the name of United Spirits (assessee), observed that the time for the AO to consider the question of disallowance of the claims of bad debts and advances written off under Section 14A stood lapsed as of March 31, 2017, and must consider the petitioner's representation dated November 29, 2020, for refund.

Husband Subjecting Wife To Creditors' Action By Misusing Her Signed Cheques Constitutes 'Cruelty': Karnataka High Court

Case Title: ABC And XYZ

Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4402 OF 2017 (FC) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4403 OF 2017

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 351

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed the appeal preferred by a man challenging a family court order which allowed the divorce petition filed by his wife on grounds of cruelty, since he made her face criminal proceedings initiated by creditors from whom he borrowed money by issuing cheques in her name, for meeting his lifestyle and addictions.

A Division bench of Justice G Narendar and Justice Vijaykumar A Patil said, “The appellant-husband in his written statement and evidence has only denied the allegations of cruelty however, he has not taken any stand with regard to using of signed cheques of the respondent-wife, which clearly goes to show that the appellant-husband has made the respondent-wife a scapegoat and made her to face criminal proceedings initiated by his creditors.”

It added “These acts of the appellant-husband have caused humiliation and mental cruelty, which have been properly pleaded and proved by respondent-wife before the Family Court.”

Sister Cannot Seek Compassionate Appointment Upon Death Of Married Brother: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Pallavi G M And Managing Director & Others

Case No: Writ Appeal No 626 of 2023

Citation: LiveLaw (Kar) 352

The Karnataka High Court has held that a sister cannot be appointed on compassionate grounds upon the death of her married brother, who was working as Junior Line Men with Bangalore Electricity Supply Company (Bescom).

A Division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit referred to Rule 2(1)(b) of Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996, which stipulates that "family" for the purpose of these rules,- (i) in the case of the deceased male married Government Servant, his widow, son and daughter (unmarried/married/divorced/widowed) who were dependent upon him and were living with him."

S.263 Indian Succession Act | Beneficiary Of Will Bound To Prove Contention Of Improper Service Of Notice Of Probate Proceedings: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Mrs. Eulalia Sequeira Nee Menezes and Cyril Anthony Menezes & Others.

Case No: M.F.A. NO.12112/2007

Citation: LiveLaw (Kar) 353

The Karnataka High Court has ruled that the burden is on the beneficiary of the will to substantiate the contention of no proper service of notice of probate proceedings on the persons who should have been apprised.

Justice H P Sandesh thus allowed the appeal challenging the order of the trial court which dismissed her petition filed under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act, seeking to revoke the probate granted in favour of the respondents.

“The burden is on the respondents to substantiate the contention of proper service, since the person who asserts the same has to be proved.”

Karnataka High Court Quashes Bribery Case Against IPS Officer Alok Kumar

Case Title: Alok Kumar v Mallikarjun B M alias Ravi

Case No: Criminal Petition No 2164 of 2023.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 354

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings against senior Indian Police Service (IPS) Officer Alok Kumar under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Justice M Nagaprasanna found that the Sessions Judge had not received a valid sanction to prosecute the IPS officer, who was not named as an accused when the case was initially registered. “Since there is no sanction accorded to prosecute the petitioner prior to the order of the learned Sessions Judge taking cognizance of the offence, I deem it appropriate to obliterate the proceedings against the petitioner, reserving liberty to the concerned Court to proceed against the petitioner only after a valid sanction from the hands of the Competent Authority is placed before it.”

Advocate's Movement Between Courts Affected By Lower Limb Disability, Impacts Income: Karnataka HC Enhances Motor Accident Compensation

Case Title: Meenakumari K R And Mission Director (NRLM) & others.

Case No: Miscellaneous First Appeal No 3721 of 2022 C/W Miscellaneous First Appeal No 3583 of 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 355

The Karnataka High Court has enhanced the compensation awarded to an advocate by the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal, stating that the disability of lower limb certainly hinders her ability to efficiently serve clients and move quickly between courts, potentially impacting her income and professional responsibilities.

A division bench of Justice K Somashekar and Justice Umesh M Adiga partly allowed the appeal filed by a 66-year-old Advocate and increased the compensation amount to Rs.21,78,350, as against Rs.15,78,350 awarded by the Tribunal.

Parents' Mistake Can't Deprive Child Of Birth Certificate For Eternity: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Fathima Richelle Mather v. Registrar of Births and Deaths & Commissioner, BBMP

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 18413 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 356

The Karnataka High Court has allowed a petition seeking a direction to the civic body to insert the petitioner's name in her birth certificate observing that 'a mistake by the parents cannot put the child at a disadvantage'.

Justice Suraj Govindaraj thereby quashed the endorsement issued by the civic body rejecting her application holding that the identity and the paternity of the petitioner were not disputed and hence she could not be denied a birth certificate with her name on it.

When Husband Leads Luxury Life, Wife Can't Be Left In Lurch: Karnataka HC Enhances Maintenance Of Former Judge's Daughter To ₹1.5 Lakh A Month

Case Title: ABC AND XYZ

Case NO: WP 2688 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 357

The Karnataka High Court recently granted relief to the daughter of a former High Court judge, enhancing monthly maintenance payable to her by her husband to Rs. 1.5 lakh.

Relying on Apex court judgments, Single bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna observed that when the husband is or has been in the realm of luxury lifestyle, the wife and their son cannot be left in the lurch.

The Court rejected the appeal preferred by the husband challenging the family court order directing him to pay Rs 75,000 per month to his wife. Further, it partly allowed the wife's plea seeking enhancement of maintenance. It observed, “The husband is undoubtedly doing well for himself with five Companies in his kitty, and documents are produced which would demonstrate that the Companies are doing well and the loan that is projected is taken only after initiation of proceedings for grant of maintenance by the wife. If the facts in the case at hand are considered, the wife would become entitled to enhancement of maintenance not to the extent of enhancement sought at 2,00,000, per month, but is entitled to enhancement by 75,000, over and above what is granted by the concerned Court.”

Land Earmarked For Village Cattle Can Be Diverted For Larger Public Purposes Like Waste Disposal Unit: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Veerbhadra Gowda & ANR AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 17835 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 358

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation questioning a Deputy Commissioner's order reserving 5 acres gomal land in Soraba Taluka, earmarked for village cattle, for establishment of Solid and Liquid Waste Disposal Unit.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit observed, “It is not that the gomal land can never be diverted to other larger public purposes like the one put in challenge. There is absolutely no material on record to substantiate the argument that any provision of law is violated by diversion of the Government land for the purpose of waste management which in turn serves the interest of environment and ecology.”

Sites For Civic Amenities Like Parks, Healthcare Centres Crucial In Shaping Quality Of Urban Life, Cannot Be Sold: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Mohan Vasudev Chavan And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 102318 OF 2016

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 359

The Karnataka High Court has set aside an order passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Belgavi) resolving to sell a plot reserved for civic amenities by invoking Section 72(2) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act.

The provision enables every municipal council to lease or sale or otherwise transfer any movable or immovable property owned by the local authority, so far as is not inconsistent with the provisions and purposes of the Act.

S.498A IPC | Karnataka High Court Quashes Wife's Criminal Complaint Against Husband For Refusing Money To Perform Pooja

Case Title: Vivekananda Kemali And State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101804 OF 2019

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 360

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a complaint registered against a man by his wife under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code after he refused to give money to her to buy necessities for the performance of a pooja.

The Court found that the wife's allegations in the complaint did not meet the essential ingredients required to invoke Section 498A (cruelty) against the husband. “The complaint is so vague as it would fetter vagueness itself. The investigation has led to filing of the charge sheet, without rhyme or reason, fortunately leaving out the parents, in the charge sheet. It is filed only against the husband and against the husband what is found is as afore-quoted. Therefore, the offence punishable under Section 498A is recklessly and loosely laid against the petitioner.”

[Suit For Specific Performance] Impleading Proper Party Enables Court To Adjudicate Lis Completely: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Chinnaswamy Gowda And Shivramu C M Shivaramu & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.1621 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 361

The Karnataka High Court has said that impleading of proper parties as defendants in a suit filed for specific performance of contract, enables the Court to adjudicate the lis pending before it completely and it will have complete facts and evidence before it, to arrive at a just and proper conclusion

A single judge bench of Justice Vijaykumar A Patil dismissed the petition filed by one Chinnaswamy Gowda questioning a trial court order allowing an impleadment application under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC to bring 45 defendants on record in the suit filed by him. It observed, “In the instant case, the contesting respondents may not be necessary parties but proper parties to the suit. The presence of proposed defendants would enable the Court to adjudicate the lis pending before it completely and will have complete facts and evidence before it, to arrive at a just and proper conclusion with regard to grant of relief sought by the plaintiff.”

Doctrine Of State Humanity Doesn't Cover Acts Done By Public Servant For Her/His Own Benefit Or Pleasure: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: D Roopa And Rohini Sindhuri

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4575 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 362

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash the defamation complaint lodged against IPS officer D Roopa by IAS Officer Rohini Sindhuri for allegedly publishing defamatory content against her.

Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum rejected the argument made by Roopa that the allegations averred in the private complaint, the statements were made by her in her official capacity and therefore, in the absence of sanction, the Magistrate erred in entertaining the private complaint for the offence punishable under Section 499 of IPC.

Govt Authorities Can't Use Alternate Remedy Doctrine As A 'China Wall' Against Invocation Of Writ Jurisdiction: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Pigeon Education Technology India Private Limited And Directorate of Enforcement & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 11532 of 2023.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 363

The Karnataka High Court has observed that the doctrine of alternate remedy cannot be used as a rigid barrier against invocation of its writ jurisdiction, especially by entities falling under Article 12 of the Constitution.

Justice Krishna S Dixit relied on the Supreme Court decision in Godrej Sara Lee Ltd vs. Excise & Taxation Officer to hold so. “In all cases, the entities answering Article 12 of the Constitution of India cannot press into service the doctrine of alternate remedy as the China Wall against the invocation of writ jurisdiction.”

Strangers To Criminal Trial Can't Seek Fresh Probe Citing Social Unrest Upon Acquittal Of Accused: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Girish Bharadwaj & Others And Union of India & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 19366 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 364

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a PIL seeking a fresh investigation by either the CBI or Special Investigation Team (SIT) in the 2012 case of rape and murder of a 17-year-old student.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed the plea while stating that persons unrelated to the criminal case could not seek a fresh investigation upon acquittal or conviction of the accused.“The acquittal order is not put in challenge in this PIL and rightly so. The same can be put in challenge in an appeal. As long as that order stands, in our opinion a de novo investigation cannot be ordered for an askance by persons who were neither victims, complainants, witnesses or in any way associated with the criminal case in question.”

S.407 CrPC | Reasonable Apprehension Of Injustice Necessary To Transfer Criminal Cases : Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Santosh & Others And State Through Ashok Nagar PS

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200338 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 365

The Karnataka High Court has held that criminal cases cannot be transferred between courts within the State under Section 407 based on mere allegations made by the accused that there is apprehension of injustice.

Justice Venkatesh Naik T ruled that there must be a reasonable apprehension of injustice for a transfer to be successful. "any party can seek the transfer of case within the State under Section 407 of Cr.P.C. The apprehension of not getting a fair and impartial trial is required to be reasonable and not imaginary based upon conjunctures and surmises. The cases cannot be transferred on mere allegations that there is apprehension that justice will not be done. For transfer of criminal case, there must be a reasonable apprehension on the part of the party to a case that justice will not be done."

Karnataka High Court Refuses To Issue Direction For Registration Of Post Graduate In Alternative Medicines Citing Absence Of Regulatory Body

Case Title: Dr Mohan Bhatta M R And State of Karnataka & Others

Case NO: Writ Appeal No 478 of 2023.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 366

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed an appeal challenging a single bench order rejecting the petition filed by one Dr Mohan Bhatta M R, who holds a PG Degree from Indian Board of Alternative Medicines, seeking registration certificate to practise under the Karnataka Private Medical Establishments Act 2007.

While doing so, a division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit remarked, “The protection of the Public includes not only matters relating to the health, safety and wellbeing of the public but also the maintenance of public confidence in the medical profession and the maintenance of proper professional standards & conduct.”

Karnataka High Court Directs Health Dept To Release Gratuity Withheld Since 16 Yrs, Says It's No 'Bounty' Dependant On Employer's Sweet Will

Case Title: Babu s/o Shankarappa Mukkannvar And Union of India & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No: 111248/2014

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 367

Observing that “gratuity is not a bounty that can be withheld at the sweet will or whim of the employer,” the Karnataka High Court recently directed State's Health Secretary to disburse the gratuity amount of a former employee which has been pending for the last 16 years, within 30 days.

A single bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by 74-year-old retired employee and directed release of gratuity amount of Rs 4,09,550 along with interest.

Continuing In Service After Probation Period Doesn't Imply Automatic Confirmation Unless Expressly Provided Or In Exceptional Case: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Kum Sowmya R AND Registrar General & Others

Case No: Writ Appeal No 1154 of 2023.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 368

The Karnataka High Court has held that a person appointed on probation becomes a permanent employee only after the issue of an express order of confirmation.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed the appeal filed by a woman who was not confirmed to the post of stenographer in the Court of Civil Judge, Virajpet on completion of the probation period. It held, “By mere expiry of the period of probation and continuing in service after the expiry of the period of probation, a civil servant does not automatically acquire the status of a permanent member of the service, unless the rules expressly provide for automatic confirmation.”

Cannot Interfere With Govt's Elevated Corridor Project In Hubli Merely Because Some Petitioners Claim To Be Experts: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Vikram & Others AND Union of India & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 4352 of 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 369

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation questioning the construction of an Elevated Corridor for Decongestion of traffic at Rani Chennamma Circle in Hubli City.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit said, “Merely because some of the petitioners too have expertise in the matter arguably, they cannot arrogate to themselves all the wisdom & expertise and thereby brand the project in question as being unwise and not feasible.”

Judgment Debtor Must Pay Interest Till Compensation Is Paid Even If Amount Deposited In Court During Appeal: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: The Divisional Manager The New India Insurance Company Ltd AND Nagaraj

Case No: Writ Petition No 201824 of 2023.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 370

The Karnataka High Court recently held that when a judgment or award is passed in favour of a party, such party would be entitled to the principal amount and interest thereon till the date of receipt of the amounts.

Justice Suraj Govindaraj added that merely because the judgment debtor was to deposit the amounts in a court of law while filing an appeal against the trial court order, the obligation to pay the interest amount till payment of the compensation amount would not cease.

Can't Say He Was Involved Merely Because He Was ADGP: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail To IPS Officer In Police Recruitment Scam Case

Case Title: Amrit Paul And State By High Ground PS

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3696 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 371

The Karnataka High Court has granted bail to IPS Officer Amirt Paul who was arrested in connection to an alleged scam in recruiting police sub-inspectors for the State Police.

A single judge bench of Justice Mohammad Nawaz granted bail to Paul who has been in custody since his arrest on 04.07.2022. The bench granted bail to the accused on the execution of a personal bond of Rs 5,00,000, with two sureties for like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

Perjury | Not Every False Statement Made In Court Can Be Subject Matter Of Prosecution, Prima Facie Deliberate Intention Must: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Rajesh K N & K R Umesh & ANR

Case No: Criminal Appeal No 1378 of 2023.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 372

The Karnataka High Court has said that before directing initiation of perjury proceedings against a party for making false statements before the court, it must form an opinion on being satisfied that the person charged has intentionally given false evidence/statements and such formation of opinion must be on consideration of materials duly placed before it.

A single judge bench of Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar observed, “It is not every false statement that is intended to be the subject matter of the prosecution...There must be prima facie case of deliberate false on a matter of substance and the Court must be satisfied and there must be reasonable foundation for the charge and the prosecution of the offender is necessary in the interest of justice. Otherwise, time of the Court, which has to be usefully devoted for dispensation of justice, will be wasted on such enquiries.”

State Not 'Victim' In Criminal Trials, Cannot Invoke S.372 CrPC To Challenge Acquittal; May Proceed U/S 378 CrPC: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: State of Karnataka AND Malleshnaika

Case No: Criminal Revision Petition No 816 of 2019.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 373

The Karnataka High Court has held that the State Government cannot be construed as a 'victim' under Section 372 CrPC and an appeal filed by it against an acquittal order is not maintainable under the said provision.

A single judge bench of Justice S Rachaiah pointed that the legislature has provided a separate provision for the State, Section 378 CPC, to prefer appeal against acquittal. It observed,

"When there is separate provision stipulated to file an appeal against the acquittal to the State...the State cannot exercise the jurisdiction which is meant for the victim under Section 372 of Cr.P.C. There is a distinction between the two provisions, the victim has to file an appeal under Section 372 of Cr.P.C., against the order of acquittal. Whereas the State has to file an appeal under Section 378(1) and (3) of Cr.P.C. When there is a distinct provision distinctly conferring certain rights to the victim and the State independently, it is necessary to exercise their respective jurisdiction independently.

Mere Allegations Of Harassment For Demand Of Loan Repayment Not Abetment Of Suicide U/S 306 IPC Without Mens Rea: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Mangala Gowri And State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 276 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 374

The Karnataka High Court has held that insisting the deceased to repay the loan borrowed by him does not amount to abetment to commit suicide under Section 306 IPC.

Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar added that mere harassment or demands for loan repayment, without the intention to drive the person to suicide, do not constitute abetment.

“There is no evidence to show that the appellant/accused had intention to drive out the deceased Raju to commit suicide. Looking from any angle, the act of the appellant/accused harassing the deceased for repayment of money borrowed and threatening him to take his life does not amount to abetment.”

Karnataka High Court Disapproves Government Advertisements That Contain Images Of Political Leaders But Not Legally Prohibited

Case Title: Bhimappa Gundappa Gadad And State of Karnataka

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 20404 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 375

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation seeking the removal of the names and photographs of Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar, and other concerned ministers from various advertisements and sanction orders related to government schemes called Gruhalakshmi and Gruha Jyothi Schemes.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit acknowledged that in a democratic republic like India, governments regularly communicate their policies and programs to the public, and such advertisements are a part of this process.

Ex-Parte Order Of German Court Granting Custody To Mother Not Acceptable, Welfare Of Child Paramount: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: ABC & State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: W.P.H.C NO.79 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 376

The Karnataka High Court has refused to accept an ex-parte order passed by a court in Germany, granting custody of a 9 year old child to his mother who resides there.

A division bench of Justice P S Dinesh Kumar and Justice T G Shivashankare Gowda dismissed a petition filed by a woman seeking custody of her child who is presently residing with his father.

The woman had argued that a German Court where she resides now has transferred the right to decide the place of residence and school in her favour. However, the court rejected this contention saying “It is an ex parte order passed by the German Court whilst the child was in India.”

Karnataka High Court Allows Probe Against MLA For Allegedly Granting Govt Land To Ineligible Persons

Case Title: K Y Nanjegowda & Others And State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: Writ Petition No 22072 of 2022.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 377

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by Congress MLA K.Y.Nanjegowda and three others seeking to quash a criminal case registered against them alleging the grant of government land worth around Rs 150 crore to ineligible persons in his capacity as Chairman and Members of Malur taluk Land Grant Committee in 2019.

Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed the petition and permitted further investigation against the petitioners noting that investigation should not be paused merely because one of the accused is an MLA.

Merely because one of the petitioners is a Member of the Legislative Assembly, it is no law that no investigation should be conducted. As it is trite that every one, whether individually or collectively, is and are under the supremacy of the law; whoever they may be, however high may be, they are under the law, how powerful they are hardly matters, in a nation governed by rule of law.

Karnataka High Court Closes Contempt Case Against Doctor Mother Who Failed To Comply With Custody Order, Directs Her To Do Community Service

Case Title: High Court of Karnataka And Dr Ekta Singh

Case No: 08-09-2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 378

The Karnataka High Court recently dropped the contempt proceedings initiated against a doctor after she tendered her unconditional apology and offered to engage herself a day of every calendar month in Community Services for six months in any Government Hospital of Bengaluru City.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit accepted the statement made by the woman and said “We accept the unconditional apology tendered by the Respondent /Accused treating her assurance as an undertaking given to this Court. We further make it clear that as per the said assurance/undertaking, if the Respondent/Accused approaches any of the Government Hospitals, they will permit her to render community services one full day in a month, for a period of six months from today.”

Driver Not Holding Valid Driving License Doesn't Automatically Lead To Finding Of 'Contributory Negligence': Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Shivamma & Others AND Govind Malothu & ANR

Case No: MISCL First Appeal No 200517 of 2019

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 379

The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that though driving a vehicle without a licence is an offence but the same by itself, may not lead to a finding of contributory negligence against the driver when met with an accident not caused by him.

A division bench of Justice Mohammad Nawaz and Justice Rajesh Rai K modified the order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal which tied 23% contributory negligence to the deceased, saying he did not possess any driving licence and the vehicle (Motorcycle driven by deceased) was not having insurance coverage.

Attesting Witness To Sale Deed Can't Be Held Criminally Liable For Cheating In Absence Of Any Allegations Against Them: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Rajesh Totaganti And State of Karnataka & Anr

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100659 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 380

The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that an attesting witness to a sale deed cannot be dragged into a case of cheating if there is no other allegation against him except that he is an attesting witness.

Justice M Nagaprasanna thus allowed the petition filed by one Rajesh Totaganti and quashed the proceedings initiated against him for offences punishable under sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 474 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

"While accused No.1 gets all the benefits, accused No. 2 and 3 have been in active support of acts of accused No.1. The benefit of the forgery is the sale deed. A perusal at the sale deed would indicate that the petitioner is an attesting witness to the sale deed. Except this allegation of the petitioner acting as an attesting witness and a friend of accused No.1, there is no other allegation against the petitioner that would touch upon any of the ingredients of the alleged offences."

No Compassionate Appointment To Married Daughter Residing With Husband: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Megha J And Life Insurance Corporation of India

Case No: Writ Appeal No 891 of 2023.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 381

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed the appeal preferred by the married daughter of a deceased LIC employee seeking compassionate appointment.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit observed that the appellant was married long before her father's death and was in any case residing with her husband.

“Our scriptures injunct "bharta rakshati yavvane…" literally meaning that it is the duty of husband to provide maintenance to his dependent wife. That is how our legislations too are structured e.g., Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (applicable to all regardless of religions), Sections 24 & 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (applicable to Hindus, in a broad sense of the term), Section 37 of the Divorce Act, 1869 (applicable to Christians), Section 40 of the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936 (applicable to Parsis), Section 20 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (applicable to all persons regardless of religion and marital status), Sections 36 & 37 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 (applicable to Muslims wives), etc., have been structured,” it observed.

PWD Cannot Permit Any Construction On Road Margin Of State Highways, Permission From Local Municipal Authority Must: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Severine Lobo And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 13696 OF 2022, C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 4870 OF 2023.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 382

The Karnataka High Court has held that though the road margin on a State Highway vests with the Public Works Department, it cannot sanction or allot a road margin area to any private party for putting up construction of any nature, even if such construction is for public convenience, without approval from Municipal Authority.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj allowed the petition filed by Severine Lobo, who challenged the order of PWD's Assistant Executive Engineer granting licence to one Saroja for putting a Nandani milk parlour on a State highway margin in front of his property at Mangalore.

Karnataka Govt Introduces Compensation Policy For Unnatural Deaths In Prisons, High Court Disposes PIL

Case Title: High Court of Karnataka v State of Karnataka & Others

Case NO: WP 51738/2017

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 383

The Karnataka government has informed the High Court that it has introduced a policy aimed at providing compensation to the next of kin or legal heirs of deceased prisoners who have met with unnatural deaths while in prison.

The submission was made in a suo motu plea initiated to ensure the implementation of directions issued by the Supreme Court on September 15, 2017, in Re Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons aimed at identifying cases of unnatural deaths in prisons and providing compensation to the next of kin of the deceased.

Wife Living In Adultery Not Entitled To Maintenance From Husband Under Domestic Violence Act: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: ABC & XYZ

Case NO: Criminal Revision Petition No 56 of 2016

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 384

The Karnataka High Court has held that a wife cannot claim maintenance from her husband under section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, when she is in an adulterous relationship with another person.

A single judge bench of Justice Rajendra Badamikar rejected the revision petition filed by the wife seeking to set aside the order of the Sessions court which in turn had set aside the order of maintenance granted in favour of the wife by the Magistrate court on her making an application.

The bench said, “The oral and documentary evidence produced clearly establishes that the petitioner is not honest towards her husband and she has got extramarital affairs with the neighbour and all along, she asserted that she used to stay with him. When the petitioner is staying in adultery, the question of she claiming maintenance does not arise at all.”

Copyright Holder's Suit Against Infringement Bars Alleged Infringer From Filing Suit U/S 60 Copyright Act: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: M/s Chancery Pavilion And M/s Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd & Others.

Case No: REGULAR FIRST APPEAL No.145/2015

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 385

The Karnataka High Court has said that a suit filed under Section 60 of the Copyright is not maintainable if a suit seeking action is filed by the copyright holder for infringement against the alleged offender.

Justice V Srishananda clarified that the proviso to Section 60 of the Copyright Act was meant to prevent an alleged infringer from filing a suit when the owner of the copyright had previously filed a suit under Section 55. In this case, the order of events favoured the defendants, as they had filed their suit after the plaintiff had filed its suit.

Jamakhandi Residents Can Adopt Major Person, It's A Legally Recognized Custom: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Sharada Hanamanth Walagad & ANR AND NIL

Case No: W.P. NO. 104785 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 386

The Karnataka High Court has directed the trial court to reconsider the petition filed under Section 8 and 9 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, by a member of the Scheduled Caste community residing at Jamakhandi, seeking to adopt a 19 year old.

A single judge bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum said adopting a major child was a legally recognised custom in Jamakhandi governed by the Bombay School of Hindu Law. “If petitioners are permanent residents of Jamakhandi, then I am of the view that since there is no dispute that Jamakhandi which was erstwhile princely State and part of Bombay province, the custom of adopting a major child is judicially recognized and therefore, I am of the view that the proof of the said custom is not necessary.”

S.17A PC Act Safeguards Public Servants From Frivolous Probe, Approval To Investigate Not Automatic Sanction To Prosecute: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Shreeroopa v. State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 20132 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 387

The Karnataka High Court has highlighted that Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act provides a protective shield for public servants from investigations related to decisions made in their official capacity.

Justice N S Sanjay Gowda clarified that the approval process is designed to balance the interests of the State and its employees.

“The integrity of a public servant is required to be beyond suspicion as in the proverbial adage that “Caesar's wife must be above suspicion”. If there exists even a shadow of doubt on the integrity of a public servant, it will not only harm his reputation but would also tarnish the entire system of which he is a part. Thus, in such a situation, if the aspersions cast on the integrity of a public servant and an Investigating Officer under the Act harbours a view that an investigation is necessary, it would be in the interests of both the Government and the public servant that such a nagging suspicion is obliterated.”

'A Bundle Of Assumptions': Karnataka High Court Dismisses PIL Alleging Poor Quality Construction Of Parshuram Theme Park In Udupi

Case Title: Pramod Hanumanth Rao Muthalik & Anr v State of Karnataka & Ors

Case No: WP 22002/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 388

The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday dismissed a public interest litigation filed by the President of Sriram Sena, challenging the alleged poor quality of work being undertaken in constructing the Parshuram Theme Park in the Udupi district.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit found that there was a delay in filing the PIL and that it was riddled with assumptions. “The petition is filed at a very belated stage. Secondly, the petition is nothing but a bundle of assumptions and presumptions of the petitioners and his own impressions."

Violative Of Child Labour Rules: Karnataka High Court Backs Sahitya Akademi's Job Offer Withdrawal To 15 Yr Old

Case Title: Vivek Hebbale And Sahitya Akademi & ANR

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.202397 OF 2022

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 389

The Karnataka High Court has upheld the decision of the Sahitya Akademi to withdraw the job offer letter given to a minor aged about 15 years and 6 months at the time of his appointment.

Justice E S Indiresh ruled that such an age would violate the provisions of Rule 2B of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulations) Amendment Rules, 2017. “The prohibition under the provisions of Rule 2B of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulations) Amendment Rules, 2017 is applicable to the case on hand and accordingly, the respondents-academy rightly withdrawn the appointment.”

Karnataka High Court Confirms Order Of Reduction In Basic Pay Imposed On "Tipsy" Bus Conductor Who Misbehaved With Passengers

Case Title: Bengaluru Metropolitan Transport Corporation Limited And H B Siddarajaiah

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.58780 OF 2014

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 390

The Karnataka High Court has held that the Industrial Tribunal cannot modify the minor penalty of reduction of basic pay to the minimum, imposed on a tipsy bus conductor found to be misbehaving with passengers.

A single judge bench of Justice Jyoti Mulimani allowed the petition filed by Bengaluru Metropolitan Transport Corporation (BMCT), set aside the order of the Tribunal and confirmed the order of penalty passed against H.B.Siddarajaiah, by the Corporation.

S.439(1A) CrPC | Denial Of Victim's Right To Be Heard Valid Ground To Cancel Bail: Karnataka High Court Issues Directions

Case Title: Informant v State of Karnataka & Anr

Case No: CRL.P.No.3701/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 391

In a landmark ruling, the Karnataka High Court has issued a slew of directions to be followed by trial courts and the prosecution to ensure effective compliance with Section 439(1A) of CrPC which mandates victim participation while deciding bail application filed by the accused in sexual assault cases.

Justice S Vishwajith Shetty added that the obligation to notify the informant or victim of the bail application was on the court and prosecution and a failure to comply with this requirement led to a violation of the petitioner's rights.

Recruitment Process Matters To Be Filed In Administrative Tribunals First, HCs Only Authorised To Review U/Art 226, 227: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Narendra Babu G.V & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT APPEAL No.305 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 392

The Karnataka High Court has held that in matters related to the recruitment process, administrative tribunals are the courts of first instance, and High Courts have the role of judicial review under Article 226/227 of the Indian Constitution.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice M G S Kamal added that the Administrative Tribunals Act has been promulgated for adjudication or trial of disputes and complaints regarding recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to public services by the Administrative Tribunals.

POCSO Act Prevails Over SC-ST Act, Bail Plea U/S 439 CrPC Maintainable If Accused Charged Under Both: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Somashekhar And State by Rural Police Station.

Case No: Criminal Petition No. 7421 of 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 393

The Karnataka High Court has held that where the offences punishable under the provisions of two special enactments viz, the Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and POCSO Act are invoked, the POCSO Act, being a later enactment, should prevail over the Atrocities Act.

Justice S Vishwajith Shetty clarified that a petition under Section 439 of the CrPC before the High Court was maintainable when both the Atrocities Act and the POCSO Act were invoked, rather than having to file an appeal as mandated by the Atrocities Act.

'Right To Education Brutalised': Karnataka HC Upholds Land Allotment Cancellation Over Society's Failure To Construct School For Two Decades

Case Title: M/s Divyajyothi Vidya Kendra And Karnataka Housing Board & Others

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 873 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 394

The Karnataka High Court has observed that where public property is allotted for a specified purpose and if that purpose remains unaccomplished in the prescribed time, the retention of such allotment by the allottee, militates against public interest.

A Division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed the appeal filed by M/s Divyajyothi Vidya Kendra challenging a single judge bench order which had dismissed its petition questioning the order of cancellation of the allotment of the subject land. Further it had directed the Karnataka Housing Board to pass orders determining the quantum of forfeiture and refund of remaining amount to the appellant within a period of four weeks.

S.138 NI Act | Company's Liability To Repay Cheque Amount Not Affected By Changes In Officeholders: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Rajiv & Others And State Bank of India

Case no: CRIMINAL PETITION No.6481 OF 2022 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION No.7203 OF 2022.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 395

The Karnataka High Court has held in a cheque dishonour case that the legal obligation to repay the amount associated with the cheques is not altered by changes in officeholders, and the burden of proof rests with the company or its officers to rebut the presumption of liability.

Justice M Nagaprasanna added that the chairman of a company or other officers who sign cheques remain liable under Section 139 of the NI Act unless they can present evidence to prove that the cheques were not issued for payment of a legally enforceable debt or liability.

Promotion Cannot Be Denied In Cases Where Chargesheet Not Filed In Pending Criminal Case Against Employee: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Jayashree And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 102595 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 396

The Karnataka High Court has held that promotion to a government employee cannot be denied on the ground that a criminal case was pending against him wherein the chargesheet is not filed, or in cases where Articles of Charge are not issued, on the date of Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) Meeting.

A division bench of Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar and Justice G Basavaraja allowed the petition filed by Jayashree and set aside the order dated 30th March 2023 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Belagavi Bench, whereby the application filed by the petitioner questioning the denial of promotion by the authorities, was dismissed by the Tribunal.

Telangana Legislator Raja Singh Uncharged From Hatred Case As Sanction U/S 196 CrPC Is Not Obtained | Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Rajasingh Takur @ T Raja Singh & Others And State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.2576 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 397

The Karnataka High Court has held that without the necessary sanction under Section 196 of the CrPC, the proceedings under Section 153A of the IPC could not continue, thereby clarifying that the absence of sanction was a fundamental defect in the prosecution.

Justice M Nagaprasanna thus quashed the proceedings initiated against Telangana legislator Raja Singh Thakur and other accused for offences punishable under Sections 153A r/w 34 of the IPC and Section 25(1AA) of the Indian Arms Act.

Karnataka HC Quashes LOC Against Brother Of Bitcoin Scam Accused, Says ED Can't Repeatedly Summon A Person U/S 50 PMLA On Mere Suspicion

Case Title: Sudarshan Ramesh AND Union of India & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 17027 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 398

The Karnataka High Court has held that summoning of a person repeatedly under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, without probable cause or reasonable ground and only on the ground of suspicion alone is not in accordance with the principles of due causes and fairness.

A single judge bench of Justice Hemant Chandangoudar said, “Section 50 is a crucial provision and states that a person, who is being summoned for investigation must be provided with a written notice specifying the nature and the reasons for it. While the said provision does not explicitly use the term " Probable cause", it emphasises the importance of providing valid reasons and grounds for summoning an individual. The purpose of this provision is to protect the right of the person being summoned and ensure that investigation is not arbitrary.”

Hindu Succession Act | Mother Can Claim Share In Deceased Son's Ancestral Property Despite Her Husband's Claim: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: T N Susheelamma & ANR AND Chirag Raghavendra & Others

Case No: R.S.A. NO.1090/2020

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 399

The Karnataka High Court has held that a mother of a pre-deceased son becomes a Class-I heir in the son's share in the ancestral and joint family properties, even if her husband is alive and can claim a share in the property under the Hindu Succession Act.

Justice H P Sandesh allowed the appeal filed by TN Susheelamma who expired during the pendency of the proceedings and reversed the first appellate court order which held that the mother of the pre-deceased son—Santhosh, is not entitled to any share. “Once impleaded as party and she is also a Class-I heir of the deceased Santhosh, ought not to have answered the same as negative and she is also a necessary party to the said suit, since the deceased passed away leaving behind the mother, wife and son and they are the Class-I heirs of the deceased Hindu male member of the joint family and the original appellant herein is also entitled for a share in the property left by the deceased Santhosh as Class-I heir and the very approach of the First Appellate Court is erroneous.”

Karnataka High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Under Wildlife Protection Act Against State Horticulture Minister SS Mallikarjun

Case Title: Sampanna Mutalik & ANR AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.5952 OF 2023 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION No.5741 OF 2023 CRIMINAL PETITION No.5788 OF 2023.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 400.

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings pending under several provisions of the Wildlife (Protections) Act and the IPC against State's Horticulture minister S.S. Mallikarjun, his brother S S Ganesh and two others.

Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed their plea observing that there were glaring irregularities in the procedure adopted in the case. “Finding no procedure or the procedure completely topsyturvy in the cases at hand would mean that the entire proceedings need to be obliterated as glaring procedure aberrations noticed cannot be countenanced and further proceedings cannot be permitted to continue by a fiat of this Court as they are all incurable illegalities cutting at the root of the matter and become an abuse of the process of the law.”

Karnataka High Court Dismisses Deputy CM DK Shivakumar's Plea To Quash CBI's Disproportionate Assets Case Against Him, Vacates Stay On Probe

Case Title: D K Shivakumar AND Central Bureau of Investigation

Case No: Writ Petition No 15251 of 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 401

The Karnataka High Court today dismissed Deputy Chief Minister DK Shivakumar's plea to quash CBI's disproportionate assets case against him under provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Single bench of Justice K Natarajan also vacated the interim stay on CBI probe and ordered the central agency to complete its investigation and file the final report within 3 months.

The Income Tax department had carried out a raid in August 2017 at various premises of Shivakumar in New Delhi and other places and they collected Rs.8,59,69,100. It is alleged that Rs.41.00 lakhs was recovered from his premises.

Karnataka High Court Directs BBMP To Digitize Old Property Records

Case Title: Aslam Pasha AND Chief Commissioner & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 21775 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 402

The Karnataka High Court has directed the Chief Commissioner of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), to initiate digitization of all the old property records, so that the same is available electronically/digitally tagged.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj had directed the Chief Commissioner of BBMP to co-ordinate with the Principal Secretary, e-Governance Department to formulate a mechanism for making available the plan sanctions, katha certificates, tax paid receipts, Self-Assessment forms etc., as regards any particular property to all officers of the corporation who are authorised to take penal action under the Act, by granting them user credentials in terms of user name and password so that the same is not available to any third parties.

Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash CBI Proceedings Against Doctor Accused Of Malpractice In 2006 PG Entrance Test

Case Title: Dr Nehal Bansal AND Central Bureau of Investigation

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.5341 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 403

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings initiated by the CBI against a doctor facing allegations of malpractice in the entrance test conducted by the Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences (RGUHS) for admission to a postgraduate medical course in 2006.

Justice M Nagaprasanna found that the petitioner's discharge was not warranted based on some witness statements and a trial was needed for the petitioner to challenge these statements.“With the statements of CWs-55, 56 and the documents it cannot be said that the petitioner is entitled for a discharge from the array of accused. Polygraph tests may be the foundation. But, the evidence is on the basis of documents and statements as well. Therefore, these statements will have to be put to test in a trial in which it is for the petitioner to come out clean.”

[Hindu Marriage Act] Wife's Failure To Comply With Restitution Of Conjugal Rights Decree Ground For Divorce: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: XYZ And ABC

Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 104251 OF 2017

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 404

The Karnataka High Court has dissolved the marriage between a couple, as the wife did not join the company of the husband even after the trial court passed an order for restitution of conjugal on an application filed by the husband.

A division bench of Justice S R Krishna Kumar and Justice G Basavaraja allowed the appeal filed by the husband and set aside the order of the trial court rejecting his petition seeking divorce on grounds of desertion.

Karnataka High Court Asks BBMP To Upload Daily Orders, Causelists, Judgments Of Proceedings Before Quasi-Judicial Authorities

Case Title: Umadevi M And Joint Commissioner (East) Zone & Others.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 405

The Karnataka High Court has directed the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahangara Palike (BBMP) to web host all cause lists, daily orders and judgments of proceedings before the quasi-judicial authorities of the corporation to ensure transparency and accessibility.

Justice Suraj Govindaraj also emphasised that when a matter is adjourned, the next date should be fixed or a notice should be issued to all parties about the next hearing date. “The Chief Commissioner, BBMP in association with the Principal Secretary E-Governance Department set up a system for web hosting all the cause lists and Orders passed in each of the matters on daily basis as done by this Court and the District Courts under E-Courts project and now done by the Revenue Department in respect of the Revenue Court Cases Management System, which is available at rccms.karnataka.gov.in. Detailed project report and implementation report to be placed before this Court within four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the Order.”

Order 21 Rule 97 Application Can Be Dismissed If Obstructor Fails To Meet Prima Facie Right To Show Resistance: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Tayamma @Thippamma & Others AND K Ramappa & Others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 406

The Karnataka High Court has held that an application made before the executing court under Order 21 Rule 97 of CPC, can be dismissed in limine if the obstructor fails to satisfy the court his prima facie right to show resistance to the execution.

A division bench of Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar and Justice Ramachandra D Huddar found that the executing court was correct in dismissing the application because the applicants failed to prove that their father was not alive in 1998 when the sale deed was executed and that they were the legal heirs of Belagalappa.

Karnataka High Court Expresses Concern Over 'Haystack Of Frivolous Cases' Under SC/ST Act, Asks Police To Verify Allegations While Registering Crime

Case Title: Shivalingappa B. Kerakalamatti And State of Karnataka & ANR

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 407

The Karnataka High Court recently while quashing the criminal proceedings initiated against a school headmaster under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, by a school teacher, observed,

“Haystack of frivolous cases have mushroomed to a large extent that searching a genuine case in the haystack has become like searching for a needle in a haystack, as most the cases are in abuse and misuse of the process of law, like the kind in hand.”

Karnataka High Court 'Obliterates' PMLA Proceedings Against Developer For Delay In Delivering Flat To Homebuyer

Case Title: Sushil Mantri & Others AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 408

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a criminal case for cheating registered by a home buyer against a Developer for delay in delivery of his flat. It added that ED proceedings under Prevention of Money Laundering Act will also stand obliterated.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said, “Criminal law cannot be set into motion on the said delay in delivery of flats, as those facts arise out of agreements entered into between the parties, at best, it can be breach of agreement. If it is a breach of agreement, it cannot be cheating or criminal breach of trust.”

Pendency Of Criminal Case At Time Of Making Application Valid Ground For Refusing Post In Police Dept: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Narayan Jamadar AND Karnataka State Police Department

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 409

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed the petition filed by one Narayan Jamadar, whose application for a position in the police department was rejected as a criminal case was pending against him at the time of filing the application.

A Division bench of Justice Mohammad Nawaz and Justice Rajesh Rai K said, “Even though the petitioner has been acquitted of the said offences, as on the date of filing of the application, the criminal case was pending against him and the same was not disclosed in the application, which was required to be stated. Hence, there is no merit in this writ petition and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.”

Parking Motor Vehicle On Road Without Proper Precautions Prohibited: Karnataka High Court Rejects Plea Of Contributory Negligence

Case Title: Future Gen. India Ins. Co. Ltd AND Zeenath Begum & Others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 410

The Karnataka High Court has said that no contributory negligence can be attributed to the deceased driver, who meets with an accident with a vehicle negligently parked on a National Highway.

The Insurance company Future Gen India INS Co Ltd, had approached the court challenging the order of the tribunal dated 12-11-2019, directing it to pay compensation of Rs 8,74,000 to the claimants of deceased Sadique Hussain.

S.98 Karnataka Education Act Applicable To Unaided Educational Institutions Run By Linguistic Minority Bodies: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Rajarajeshwari Dental College and Hospital And Dr Sanjay Murgod

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 580 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 411

The Karnataka High Court has held that Section 98 of the Karnataka Education Act, which pertains to the Retrenchment of Employees, is applicable to unaided educational institutions run by the linguistic minority institution.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit added that the Karnataka Education Act, 1983 and the Dentists Act, 1948 are poles apart and could not be read into each other. "The provisions of 1948 Act in essence intend to regulate the standard of professional education whereas, the provisions of Sections 97 & 98 of the 1983 Act in substance intend to secure the service conditions of employees of Educational Institutions. Thus, they are poles apart. By no stretch of imagination, one can be read into the other."

S.306 IPC | Can't Jump To Conclusions Based On Suicide Note, Contents Must Be Examined In Investigation: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Hanamantraya AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200255 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 412

The Karnataka High Court has said that merely because a person has been so named in the suicide note, one cannot immediately jump to the conclusion that he is an offender under Section 306 of Indian Penal Code, the contents of the suicide note and other attending circumstances have to be examined in a full fledged investigation.

A single judge bench of Justice Venkatesh Naik K, sitting at Kalaburagi bench dismissed the petition filed by Hanamantraya, who named in the suicide note of deceased Basavaraj who committed suicide by hanging.

The bench said, “Generally, the person who commit suicide used to/liked to leave a suicide note naming certain persons as responsible for his committing suicide. Merely because a person has been so named in the suicide note, one cannot immediately jump to the conclusion that, he is an offender under Section 306 of IPC. The contents of the suicide note and other attending circumstances have to be examined to find out whether it is abetment within the meaning of Section 306 of IPC read with Section 107 of IPC. But, in order to ascertain this factual aspect, a full fledged investigation is required as well as a trial to be held.”

Karnataka High Court Upholds Reinstatement Of KPTCL Workman Who Went On Prolonged Unauthorised Leave Due To Depression

Case Title: Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited AND S Kiran.

Case NO: WA 217/2023.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 413

The Karnataka High Court on Monday upheld an order of a Single Judge which directed the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (KPTCL) to reinstate an employee who was dismissed from service as he remained unauthorisedly absent for a long period on account of his suffering from mental depression.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit orally remarked, “Nobody will go away from the job these days. You are a state entity and you have to be very fair. The single judge bench order is by giving proper reasoning."

'Ignorance Of Law No Excuse': Karnataka HC Refuses To Quash Case Against Former Taralabalu Kendra Secretary For Storing Pistol On Religious Premises

Case Title: Dr Siddaiah S AND State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7580 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 414

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings initiated against the former secretary of Taralabalu Kendra, for possessing a pistol furnishing the address of the Kendra and keeping the pistol in the premises of the Kendra, which is a religious institution.

Justice K Natarajan pointed out that the petitioner's ignorance of the law was not a valid excuse, and the possession of a pistol was indeed prohibited under the Act. "If at all the petitioner claims he is ignorance of Section 3 and 4 of the said Act, that he has obtained the license from the police and used it, but 'the ignorance of law is not an excuse' to the petitioner and the petitioner already committed the offence under Section 3 (c), 4 of which is punishable under Section 7 of the Act."

Domestic Violence Not Established: Karnataka HC Denies Claim Of Wife Who Converted Religion, Says "Marriage Stands Dissolved" Though No Divorce

Case Title: Ramesh B S And Navaneetha

Case No: Criminal Revision Petition No.1326 of 2015.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 415

The Karnataka High Court has held that compensation under section 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 can be awarded only when Domestic Violence is established.

It set aside the order of Sessions Court partly allowing the appeal filed by the wife by awarding compensation in a sum of Rs.4,00,000 to her on ground that she is unable to maintain herself.

The bench said, “Under Section 22 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, compensation can be awarded only if Domestic Violence is proved and in fact, in the instant case, after getting converted into Christianity the revision petitioner/wife has lost all the rights vested in her. Under these circumstances, the Appellate Court has committed an error in awarding compensation and the compensation awarded that tune of Rs.4,00,000/- which has resulted in miscarriage of justice.”

City Crime Branch Can Investigate Cases Registered With Local Police Stations, Their Chargesheet Qualifies As Final Report: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Ditul Mehta & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others.

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2450 OF 2022 CONNECTED WITH WRIT PETITION NO.11718 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 416

The Karnataka High Court has held that the City Crime Branch can investigate a case registered with the city police station and filing of charge sheet on completion of investigation by the CCB police amounts to a final report under Section 173(2) of CrPC.

Justice K Natarajan thus upheld a government notification dated 25-02-2021, appointing CCB police officers and conferring on them power to exercise power of a Station House Officer of all police stations in Bangalore City.

High Court Permits Karnataka Rajyotsava Function To Be Held At Idgah Maidan

Case Title: CHAMARAJPET NAGARIKAR OKKUTA ® AND State of Karnataka

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 417

The Karnataka High Court has granted permission to Chamarajpet Nagarikar Okkuta to hold the Karnataka Rajyotsava function from November 1 to November 3 at Chamarajpet playground (Idgah Maidan ground).

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit disposed of the petition filed by the organisation observing; "The petitioner organisation must take care by issuing necessary instructions to its members not to indulge in any act whereby the communal harmony or law and order in the city is put to stake.”

Wife Cannot Seek Withdrawal Of Resignation Tendered By Husband To Employer: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: D Venkatesh AND The Registrar of Cooperative Societies & Others

Casse No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 1312 OF 2022

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 418

The Karnataka High Court has said that a wife cannot seek withdrawal of resignation submitted by her husband to his employer.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit thus dismissed the appeal calling in question a Single Judge's order whereby the resolution passed by the employer, permitting the husband to withdraw his resignation, was set at naught.

The bench said, “Admittedly, it is the spouse of the employee who had sought for the withdrawal of resignation of the employee and that too after it was duly accepted by passing the Resolution on 30.11.2021. No Rule or Ruling is brought to our notice which recognizes such a right in the spouse of an employee. Such an idea is alien to Service Law.”

Offence Of Bigamy U/S 494 IPC Applies Only Against Erring Spouse, Can't Prosecute Family Members: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Srinivas Sagar B & Others And State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7931 OF 2022 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7825 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 419

The Karnataka High Court has held that an offence under Sections 494, 495 and 496 of the IPC, which pertain to a spouse marrying again during the lifetime of husband or wife can be pursued against the erring spouse. However, other members of the family or members of the extended family of the erring spouse, cannot be prosecuted for the offence.

Justice R Nataraj said, “A perusal of Sections 494, 495 and 496 of IPC makes it clear that those offences can be pursued by a spouse against an erring spouse and the other members of the family or members of the extended family cannot be prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 494, 495 or 496 of IPC. Therefore, pursuing the case against the other accused for the offences punishable under Sections 494, 495 and 496 of IPC is unwarranted.”

Can't Compromise On Qualification When Appointing Director Of Medical Institute: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Dr Uday Mulgund And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No. WRIT PETITION NO. 105637 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 420.

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by Dr Uday Mulgund questioning an order by which he was repatriated to his original Post of Professor of the Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences, from the Post of First Director Haveri Institute of Medical Sciences.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said “The qualification cannot be given a gobye on any circumstance whether it is for the appointment of first Dean cum Director or the subsequent Dean cum Director.”

Karnataka High Court Refuses To Entertain PIL For Naming Of Roads In Consultation With Villagers

Case Title: B Narayana & Others AND State Of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 19391 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 (Kar) LiveLaw 421

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that which road should be named after whom cannot be a subject matter of adjudication in a Public Interest Litigation.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed a petition filed by B Narayan and others. The petitioners had approached the court seeking a direction to the Bettahalasuru Gram Panchayat Grama Soudha to pass appropriate Resolution after taking Representation from the villagers for selecting names to be incorporated on the name plate of each road.

Karnataka High Court Ruling: Rectifications In Nomination Form Is Not Permitted Once The Form Is Submitted For Their Candidacy.

Case Title: Manjula @ Manju And The Chief Secretary & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 17758 OF 2022

Citation No. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 422.

The Karnataka High Court has held that a candidate contesting elections to a public office is not permitted to rectify defects in the nomination form at the time of scrutiny, which is done post the last date for filing of nomination.

A single judge bench of Justice Surag Govindaraj dismissed the petition filed by Manjula @ Manju, wherein her nomination for the post of Member of Tumbala Grama Panchayath from Block-II Constituency reserved for BCM-IIA Women Category, came to rejected by the returning officer.

Sting Operations By Media | Karnataka High Court Orders Media Houses To Abide by Cable TV Act

Case Title: Ashok M.S & Others And The Anti Corruption Bureau & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.15582 OF 2022 (GM-RES) C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7430 OF 2022 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7431 OF 2022 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7473 OF 2022 WRIT PETITION NO.10313 OF 2023 (GM-RES) WRIT PETITION NO.10335 OF 2023 (GM-RES) WRIT PETITION NO.10363 OF 2023 (GM-RES) WRIT PETITION NO.10549 OF 2023 (GM-RES) WRIT PETITION NO.10585 OF 2023 (GM-RES) WRIT PETITION NO.10676 OF 2023 (GM-RES) WRIT PETITION NO.10825 OF 2023 (GM-RES)

Citation No. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 423.

The Karnataka High Court has said that sting operations if conducted henceforth by media houses will have to be in strict consonance with provisions of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna upheld the validity of the sting operations carried out by Power TV on 8 Traffic Police Inspectors and 3 Assistant Commissioners of Police, which has recorded them as accepting bribes in return of official favours. It however obliterated the sting carried out where money is thrust upon a public servant of another department.

S.17A PC Act | Prior Approval Must When No 'Demand' Made By Accused Public Servant But Money Is Accepted Or Thrust Upon Him: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Ashok M.S & Others And The Anti Corruption Bureau & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.15582 OF 2022 (GM-RES) C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7430 OF 2022 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7431 OF 2022 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7473 OF 2022 WRIT PETITION NO.10313 OF 2023 (GM-RES) WRIT PETITION NO.10335 OF 2023 (GM-RES) WRIT PETITION NO.10363 OF 2023 (GM-RES) WRIT PETITION NO.10549 OF 2023 (GM-RES) WRIT PETITION NO.10585 OF 2023 (GM-RES) WRIT PETITION NO.10676 OF 2023 (GM-RES) WRIT PETITION NO.10825 OF 2023 (GM-RES)

Citation No. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 423

The Karnataka High Court has allowed the petitions filed by officials of the Commercial Tax Department and quashed proceedings initiated against them under the Prevention of Corruption Act by Karnataka Lokayukta, based on sting operations carried out by media houses. However, it refused to obliterate the proceedings initiated against traffic police personnel who permitted heavy vehicles into areas where they were prohibited to ply during certain hours, on acceptance of money.

Karnataka High Court Rejects PIL To Remove Visvesvaraya Technological University VC Citing Lack Of Petitioners' Bonafide

Case Title: Prof B Shivaraj And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.21681 OF 2022 C/W WRIT PETITION No.23349 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 424.

The Karnataka High Court has said that a petitioner who invokes PIL jurisdiction, more particularly with a prayer for a Writ of Quo Warranto, has to approach the court with 'clean heart, clean mind and clean objective'.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit made the observation while dismissing two "identical" petitions filed by Professor B Shivraj and Dr. K Mahadev, questioning the appointment of Vidyashankar S, as Vice Chancellor of Visvesvaraya Technological University. The petitioners also sought his removal on the ground that his appointment is violative of UCG regulation of Minimum qualifications for appointment of teachers and other academic staff in Universities and Colleges.

Parents Forgive Children's Misdeeds Until It Becomes Unbearable: Karnataka HC Rejects Daughter's Plea Against Cancellation Of Father's Gift Deed

Case Title: Kavitha R & ANR AND The Assistant Commissioner.

Case No. WA 488/2023

Citation No: 2023 (Kar) LiveLaw 425.

The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday dismissed an appeal filed by the daughter of an aged couple seeking to reverse the order of the single judge which had in turn upheld the order of the Assistant Commissioner, Tumkur, cancelling the gift deed executed by her father in her favour.

"Which father and mother will come and say? Unless it is unbearable for them...." a division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit remarked based on statements made before it that the parents were subjected to physical assault.

It added, “On the contrary in our society and our culture the tendency is to forgive the children in spite of their misdeeds. Sometimes this forgiving may cost them (parents) at various levels but still it is done. Only when it is unbearable...which father and mother will come and say unless there is some element of truth.”

Karnataka HC Grants Bail To Muruga Mutt Seer In POCSO Case, Says No Adverse Inference Of Influencing Witnesses By Virtue Of His Position

Case Title: Dr. Shivamurthy Murugha Sharanaru And State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5031 OF 2023 C/W CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1230 OF 2023.

Citation No. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 426

The Karnataka High Court granted bail to pontiff of Murugha Mutt of Chitradurga, Dr. Shivamurthy Muruga Sharanaru, accused of sexually abusing two minor girls staying in the hostels run by the Mutt. The seer was arrested under POCSO Act after the girls approached a Mysuru-based NGO Odanadi Seva Samsthe seeking help.

A single judge bench of Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar said bail cannot be denied merely because the accused is an influential person. "It is no doubt true that accused No.1 is the Chief of a Mutt which has a large number of devotees and followers. His position itself cannot be a reason for drawing an inference that he will try to meddle with the evidence. Mere allegation to this effect cannot be considered if a case for a bail is otherwise made out.”

Karnataka HC Pulls Up Milk Producers Federation For "Shunting" Reserved Category Candidate Sans Opportunity To Rectify Social Status Certificate

Case Title: Devaraj P R And Karnataka Cooperative Milk Producers Federation Limited.

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 708 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 427.

The Karnataka High Court recently pulled up the Karnataka Cooperative Milk Producers Federation Limited for "shunting" a reserved category candidate to the general seat merely because the Social Status Certificate which he had uploaded with the application was not clearly visible.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit said a simple intimation to the candidate of the so called defect would have been made the impugned action compliant with the principles of natural justice.

Loss Of Job No Ground To Not Pay Maintenance To Estranged Wife U/S 24 Hindu Marriage Act: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: ABC And XYZ

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 20801 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 428

The Karnataka High Court has rejected the petition filed by a husband challenging the interim maintenance granted to his estranged wife on the ground that he lost his job.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said, “The submission of the learned counsel that the husband has lost his job and cannot be directed to pay maintenance is noted only to be rejected, as the husband being an able bodied man is expected to work and take care of the wife. Any interference of the order that is impugned would run foul of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Apex Court in the case of Anju Garg And Another vs. Deepak Kumar Garg, 2022 SCC Online SC 1314.”

Karnataka High Court Dismisses Challenge To Re-Exam For Police Sub-Inspectors Recruitment

Case Title: Chandan N V and Others AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 15873 of 2022 etc.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 429.

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a batch of petitions challenging the re-exam for the recruitment of 545 police sub-inspectors. The court has directed the state government to conduct the re-examination through an independent agency, without charging any fresh fee to the candidates.

A division bench of Justice P S Dinesh Kumar and Justice T G Shivashaker Gowda dismissed the petitions. It said “The order passed by the State Government, in the facts and circumstances of this case, is just and appropriate and does not call for any interference.”

Section 166 of the MV Act | Claimant Must Present Genuine Proof | Acceptance of Guilt By Driver Is A Secondary Matter To The Tribunal

Case Title: Ganesh Achar AND United India Insurance Co LTD.

Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8145 OF 2012 (MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2731 OF 2012.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 430.

The Karnataka High Court has held that when an application is filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, it is for the claimant to prove their case by adducing independent evidence. Mere acceptance of guilt by the owner/driver of the offending vehicle can never be a ground for the tribunal to come to a conclusion, it held.

A single judge bench of Justice Lalitha Kanneganti thus dismissed the appeal filed by a claimant seeking enhancement of compensation and allowed the appeal filed by United India Insurance to set aside the order of the tribunal granting compensation to the claimant.

Trial Court Can Frame Legal Queries under Order 14 Rule 5 of CPC Before Making Final Judgment In The Form Of A Decree

Case Title: T Savitha & ANR AND B P Muniraju & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 23015 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 431.

The Karnataka High Court has said that under Order 14 Rule 5 of CPC, the trial court can at any time before passing a decree, frame an additional issue on such terms as it deems fit as may be necessary for determining the matters in controversy between the parties.

A single judge bench of Justice S G Pandit allowed the petition filed by T Savitha and another questioning the order of the trial court which dismissed their application filed under Order 14 Rule 5 to frame additional issue as to whether the suit for partial partition is maintainable.

Death By Rash & Negligent Driving: Karnataka High Court Sends Youth To 6 Months Imprisonment, Expresses Concern At Increasing Accidents

Case Title: Hanumantharayappa AND State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 784 OF 2015

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 432.

The Karnataka High Court has confirmed the sentence of six months imprisonment imposed on a youth under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for causing death of a pedestrian by rash and negligent driving.

A single judge bench of Justice Venkatesh Naik T dismissed the revision petition filed by Hanumantharayappa who at the time of offence was 21-years-old.

Referring to the Supreme Court judgments in the case of GURU BASAVARAJ @ BENNE SETTAPPA vs STATE OF KARNATAKA reported in 2012(8) SCC 734 and STATE OF PUNJAB vs SAURABH BAKSHI reported in 2015 (5) SCC 182, the bench observed:

Father Who Lost Son In Drain Accident 10 Years Ago Gets 5 Lakh Compensation After Karnataka High Court Slams Municipality

Case Title: Karan Singh S Rajpurohit And The City Municipal Council Hosapete & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 103849 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 433

The Karnataka High Court recently admonished the Hospete Municipal Council for delaying the compensation to a father for the death of his 6-year old son ten years ago after falling into a drain.

The Court pulled up the Council for not acting on the previous Court orders to consider the representation of the father for compensation and chastised its "contumacious conduct" which forced the hapless man to approach the Court on three occasions over ten years.

Karnataka High Court Convicts 10 Persons For Barging Into Harijan Colony & Assaulting Dalits

Case Title: Lakshmamma AND D R Sudeep and Others

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.876 OF 2011

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 434.

The Karnataka High Court has convicted and sentenced 10 people who in 2008 had barged into a Harijan Colony in Tumkur district, abused them and assaulted the Dalits residing there by referring to their caste names and assaulted them with clubs, stones and caused bleeding injuries.

A single judge bench of Justice J M Khazi set aside the acquittal order and convicted the accused for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) and (xi) of SC and ST (POA) Act.

Hindu Succession | Daughters Can't Be Deemed To Have Abandoned Claim In House Property Because They Forfeited Other Shares : Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Akkamahadevi & Others And Neelambika & Others

Case No: Regular First Appeal no. 100221 of 2016 c/w Regular First Appeal No. 100197 of 2016.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 435

The Karnataka High Court has held that daughters abandoning their share only in agricultural properties belonging to a joint family, which is partitioned among the sons of the propositus, cannot be deemed to have abandoned their shares in other joint family properties and they can seek partition of those properties.

A division bench of Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar and Ramchandra D Huddar dismissed the appeals arising out of a partition suit.

Writ Court Cannot Undertake Deeper Examination Of Defence Transfer Policy : Karnataka High Court Rejects IAF Officer's Plea

Case Title: Ranagaswamy B T And Union of India and Others

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 1140 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 436

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by Indian Air Force Personnel questioning his transfer posting order dated 29.12.2022.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed the appeal filed by Rangaswamy B T who had challenged the order of the single judge bench which had rejected his petition questioning the posting order.

The appellant argued that the impugned order has brought about an unjust result and a lot of hardship will be occasioned to his client if the same is not set at naught. The appellant had sought an extension of tenure for two years as the criminal case faced by him was yet to be disposed of.

Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash Proceedings Against Congress MLA Zameer Ahmed Khan In Disproportionate Assets Case

Case Title: Zameer Ahmed Khan AND The State of Karnataka By Lokayukta P.S

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.9821 OF 2022

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 437

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by Congress party legislator Zameer Ahmed Khan, seeking to quash proceedings initiated against him under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, for allegedly possessing assets disproportionate to his known source of income.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said “A perusal at the source information report or the communication under Section 66(2) of the Enforcement Directorate would prima facie bring the petitioner under the ambit of Section 13(1)(b) of the Act.”

High Court Upholds Appointment Of K. Naggana Gowda As Chairperson Of State Commission For Protection Of Child Rights

Case Title: Ashok D Sanadi And The Chief Secretary & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.25010 OF 2022

Citation NO: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 438

The Karnataka High Court has upheld the decision of the State government in appointing K. Naggana Gowda as the Chairperson of the Karnataka State Commission for Protection of Child Rights.

Dismissing the petition filed by Ashok S. Sanadi, who was not selected for the post, a Single Judge Bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said, “This Court cannot step into the shoes of the Selection Committee or assume an appellate role, over the selection made.”

[Alienation Of Waqf Property Without Sanction] Trial Court Can't Take Cognizance U/S 52A Waqf Act Based On Police Report: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Sayyad Murtuza Sayyad Kasim Haji AND State of Karnataka & Other

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100697 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 439

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that under Section 52-A (3) of the Waqf Act, the trial court can take cognizance only of the complaints made by the Board or any officer duly authorised by the State Government, it cannot take cognizance of offence based on a police report.

A single judge bench of Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar said “As per Section 52-A (3) of the Waqf Act, the Court can take cognizance only on complaint made by the Board or any officer duly authorised by the State Government in this behalf.”

Karnataka High Court Allows Thirteen Intending Couples To Undergo Surrogacy Using Donor Gametes Despite New Amendment Disallowing It

Case Title: XXX AND Union of India & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No. 15824 of 2023 etc

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 440

The Karnataka High Court has allowed a batch of petitions and permitted thirteen couples to opt for surrogacy using donor gametes (a person who provides sperm or oocyte). The bench said the new amendment to the Surrogacy Rules which prohibits the use of donor eggs for gestational surrogacy of an intending couple can be diluted on a case to case basis.

Justice M Nagaprasanna however refrained from examining the validity of the amendment, stating that the issue is pending before the Supreme Court.

The petitioners had challenged the amendment dated 14.03.2023 made to Form 2 under Rule 7 of the Surrogacy Rules, which is the form for Consent of the Surrogate Mother and Agreement for Surrogacy.

The amendment substituted paragraph 1(d) in Form 2 to ensure that a couple undergoing surrogacy cannot have donor gametes and both the male and female gamete must come from the intending couple.

Deputy Commissioners Can't Grant License For Storing More Than 600Kgs Firecrackers: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Kalavathi And Director General and Inspector General of Police & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 24195 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 441

The Karnataka High Court has directed that Deputy Commissioners henceforth shall not grant licences beyond 600 kgs of storage and selling of fireworks/crackers/sparklers, failing which they would be held accountable for any mishap.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna issued directions in regards to grant of license by authority, storing of fire crackers and safety measures to be adopted by the vendors.

Karnataka High Court Quashes Rape Case Subject To Accused Marrying Victim, Notes They Were In Consensual Relationship

Case Title: Chikkaredappa And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7066 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 442

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a rape case against an accused subject to him solemnizing marriage with the survivor, who claimed they were in a consensual relationship while she was a minor and now having attained majority, intend to marry each other.

A single judge bench of Justice Hemant Chandangoudar allowed the petition filed by Chikkaredappa and directed him to marry the survivor within one month, and register the same before the competent authority. It also quashed the proceedings registered against him under sections 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash Case Against Advocate For Failure To Disclose Criminal Cases When Applying For District Judge Post

Case Title: Palaksha S S AND The State By Vidhana Souda Police Station and Another.

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.1644 OF 2022

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 443

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash a cheating case against an advocate who allegedly suppressed information of previous criminal cases registered by and against him, while submitting his application for selection to the post of District Judge to the High Court.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed the petition filed by Palaksha S S and observed “prima facie, the petitioner is guilty of suppressing the fact of him involving in nine cases albeit their closure, just prior to the notification issued by the 2nd respondent.”

Karnataka High Court Dismisses 'Half-Baked' PIL To Revoke License Of Bar Allegedly In Close Proximity To 'Idgah'

Case Title: Balaji & Others And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WP 25270 of 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 444

The Karnataka High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation seeking to quash the license issued to a Bar and Restaurant which was allegedly within 100 meters distance of an 'Idgah,'a place for Muslim worship, in Hussainpura Village in Tumkur district.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed the petition filed by residents of the said village. It said “considering all the factual aspects of nature which emerged from the perusal of material on record that is petition and annexures. We are of the clear opinion that petitioners are approaching this court only on their assumptions and presumptions and in a haphazard manner. This court cannot entertain such half-baked petitions under the guise of public interest litigation. As such PIl is dismissed at threshold.”

[Cheque Dishonour] Accused Must Take 'Probable Defence' To Rebut Adverse Presumption U/S 139 NI Act: Karnataka High Court Reiterates

Case Title: R Pramod v Gangadharaiah

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2000 OF 2022

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 445

The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that to rebut the presumption under Section 139 Negotiable Instruments Act that cheque has been issued in discharge of a debt or liability, the accused must raise 'probable defence'.

Faced with the accused's mere denial regarding the existence of debt, Justice S Rachaiah remarked, “If the defence taken by the accused is not acceptable obviously the presumption prevails upon the failure of the defence.”

Article 261 Of Constitution Confers Conclusiveness On Judicial Records, Can't Be Disregarded Sans Special Circumstances: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Vijaya Ganapati And M/s Intuit Technology Services Private Ltd

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 501 OF 2022 (L-TER) & WRIT APPEAL NO. 1151 OF 2022

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 446

The Karnataka High Court has recently observed that the 'full faith and credit clause' under Article 261 of the Constitution of India, was introduced to provide legitimacy and conclusiveness regarding the records of judicial proceedings.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit made the observation while rejecting an appeal filed by one Vijaya Ganapthi, a former employee of M/s Intuit Technology Services Private Ltd against a single bench order which had rejected a plea challenging their termination and subsequent proceedings on the same before the labour court.

'Deity Doesn't Belong To Only A Few': Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash Case Over Denial Of Temple Entry Based On Family's Caste

Case Title: Pandurangabhat & Others And State By Malebennur Police And Another

Case No: Criminal Petition No. 1723 of 2023.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 447

The Karnataka High Court has observed that the deity in a temple cannot be imagined to be belonging to only a few.

In refusing to quash criminal proceedings against eight persons accused of stopping a family from entering a place of worship and physically as well as verbally abusing the complainant, her husband and her child, a single bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna held, Worshipping of the deity, by entering into the temple, is to be given to one and all. Any kind of bigotry or discrimination is unacceptable. Although temples are seen to be symbols of unity and inclusivity, denial of rights of temple entry and worship, to persons belonging to scheduled castes and scheduled tribes, still looms large.``

Karnataka High Court Suggests State To Conduct "e-KYC" Before Issuing Death Certificates

Case Title: Sai Lakshmi And Chief Registrar of Births and Deaths & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 6605 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 448

The Karnataka High Court has directed Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) and Secretary of e-governance to come up with a system of verifying the identification of the person who is dead on the basis of e-KYC like usage of Aadhar etc, so that no error occurs in the details which are entered firstly by the hospital and secondly while issuing the death certificate.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj said, “Whenever a death occurs in a hospital the entries made by the hospital are taken to be sacrosanct and the death certificate issued. I am of the considered opinion that the said process can give rise to several anomalies and can be misused.”

Family Pension Not Payable To Second-Wife When First Marriage Subsists: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Mahalakshmamma And The Secretary, Department of Rural Development and Panchayatraj.

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 256 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 449

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by the second wife of a deceased State employee, seeking family pension upon the death of her husband.

In dismissing her appeal upon noting that the deceased employee's first marriage was still subsisting when he married her, a division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit said, “Family Pension is payable to the “wife”, and not to those whose marriage is 'no marriage' in the eye of law, the limited status of legitimacy of children begotten therefrom, by virtue of Sec.16 1955 Act, notwithstanding.”

PC Act | Proceedings By Third Parties Not Judicial Proceedings, Employer Cannot Withhold Pension On Such Grounds: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited & Other And Mallikarjun Savanur

Case No: Writ Appeal No. 100422 of 2023.

Citation No. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 450

The Karnataka High Court has recently held that proceedings instituted by third parties against a government employee under the Prevention of Corruption Act ("PC Act"), cannot be construed to fall within the category of judicial proceedings, permitting the employer to withhold the pension of the retired employee.

In dismissing an appeal by the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited ("KPTCL") against an order of a single bench which allowed a plea by a KPTCL employee, seeking disbursal of all of his retirement benefits, a Division bench of Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav and Justice Vijaykumar A Patil observed, “The judicial proceedings instituted by third parties under the PC Act cannot be considered to be proceedings instituted under Regulation 171. Proceedings instituted by third parties cannot be construed to fall within the category of judicial proceedings permitting the employer to withhold the pension of the employee.”

Marriage Does Not Eclipse Right To Individual Privacy, Autonomy: Karnataka High Court On Wife's RTI Seeking Husband's Aadhar Details

Case Title: The Deputy Director General & FAA Central Public Information Officer & Another AND P Lavanya & Another.

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 100406 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 451

The Karnataka High Court has set aside an order of a single bench which directed the UIDAI to issue notice of hearing to an Aadhar card holder whose wife had filed an RTI application seeking personal Aadhar information, such as his address of service in order to enforce an order of maintenance.

The single bench had directed the Assistant Director General, Central Public Information Officer, UIDAI, to hold a hearing/inquiry and decide whether the husband's Aadhar details could be divulged to his wife.

Provide Form For Candidates To Disclose Pending Criminal Cases During Nomination Process: Karnataka High Court To State Election Commission

Case Title: H V Ashok And H N Gopal and Other

Case No: Writ Appeal No. 1249 of 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 452

The Karnataka High Court has directed the State Election Commission and other Agencies associated with the election process to implement directions given by the Apex Court pertaining to providing a form in which the contesting candidates are to declare their involvement in pending criminal cases, if any.

The petitioner's election had been annulled by the Election Tribunal on the ground that he had failed to disclose pending criminal cases against him, and such annulment was upheld by a single bench of the High Court.

Karnataka High Court Quashes Child Marriage Case, Holds Criminal Proceedings Against Accused-Husband Not In Interest Of Survivor And Child

Case Title: Ganesh V v. State of Karnataka,

Case No: W.P. No. 13600/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 453

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the criminal case initiated against a man (petitioner) for offences punishable u/s 9, 10 and 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, taking note of the survivor's plea that she and her child depended on him and the prosecution would not be in the interest of justice.

The survivor had appeared before the court and pleaded that the petitioner was the sole breadwinner of the family. She claimed that if the criminal proceedings were allowed to be continued and the petitioner incarcerated, she and her child would be put to more agony and misery rather than securing the ends of justice.

Disproportionate Assets Case: High Court Permits DK Shivakumar To Withdraw Challenge After Karnataka Govt Withdraws Consent For CBI Probe

Case Title: D. K. Shivakumar And State of Karnataka & Others.

Case No: WA 646 of 2023.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 454

Subsequent to the Karnataka government withdrawing consent accorded to the CBI, the High Court today permitted Deputy CM DK Shivakumar to withdraw his petition and appeal challenging the consent to prosecute him given to CBI in the disproportionate assets case.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice PB Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit said in the absence of any challenge to the GO, it cannot comment upon the government's decision to withdraw the consent. Both CBI and counsel appearing for an intervenor had argued that the GO was motivated to protect the interests of the Congress leader.

Using Residential Premises To Provide Free Lodging Services To Cancer Patients, Parents

Not Hospital Activity: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Dr. C. Vishwanath Reddy & Another v. The Commissioner BBMP & Another,

Case No: Writ Petition No. 21639/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 455

Justice Suraj Govindaraj of the Karnataka High Court recently quashed a notice issued by Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) to a non-profit organisation providing supportive care, including free lodging services, to children undergoing cancer treatment and their parents.

The notice, which was issued to non-profit organisation "Access Life Assistance Foundation" on the basis of a complaint received from certain neighbours, stated that it was using residential premises as cancer hospital and the same was impermissible without necessary trade license or otherwise.

s138 NI Act | Complainant Had No Right Over Property, Misused Cheques Issued To Grandfather: Karnataka High Court Upholds Accused's Acquittal

Case Title: Manimala @Roopa AND K Satish Kumar

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 610 OF 2011

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 456

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed an appeal upon noting that the appellant/complainant under the Negotiable Instruments (NI) Act did not possess any right over the property which had been purchased by the accused using the cheques which were dishonoured.

The Court also found that the appellant had misused the cheques which had been issued by the accused in her grandfather's (H.V.Venkatappa Reddy) name. In upholding the acquittal of the accused, a single judge bench of Justice S Rachaiah observed that the property in question was a joint family property and that no right had accrued to the appellant over the property through a partition decree or otherwise.

Karnataka Stamp Act | Stamp Duty Not Attracted On Arbitral Awards For Damages If Unrelated To Movable/Immovable Property: High Court

Case Title: Karnataka State Highways Improvement Project AND M/s. KMC - VDB (JV)

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 29440 OF 2019

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 457

The Karnataka High Court has held that an arbitral award which does not deal with either movable property or immovable property, but awards damages payable to the award holder, does not attract stamp duty under the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957.

Justice R Nataraj thus dismissed a petition challenging an order of the trial court rejecting its application seeking to impound the award of the arbitrator for non-payment of stamp duty by the respondent. "When the award of the arbitrator deals with a movable property or immovable property, by virtue of the charging clause contained in Article 11 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, such awards are bound to suffer stamp duty before it is brought for execution. In the case on hand, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the respondent, the award does not deal with either movable property or immovable property, but it awarded liquidated damages payable to the respondent, arising out of a construction contract. Therefore, the award does not attract stamp duty."

Karnataka High Court Upholds Convict's Life Sentence For Murdering Man Having Illicit Relationship With His Wife

Case Title: Sanju v. The State of Karnataka,

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100297/2019

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 458

The Karnataka High Court has upheld the conviction for murder and sentence of life imprisonment of a man, who ran over his neighbor (Jyothiba) for involvement in an illicit relationship with his wife.

A division bench of Justice HP Sandesh and Justice Ramachandra D Huddar dismissed the appellant's plea, noting that the chain of events clearly pointed to the guilt of the appellant, who fled from the spot rather than taking the victims (Jyothiba and his father) to a hospital.

“When the accident occurred, he being the neighbour, if he had not indulged in an act of committing the murder and it was merely an accident, he ought not to have fled away from the place of accident. An ordinary prudent man, when there was an accident, he would have helped to shift injured persons to the hospital, since he is acquainted with victims 1 and 2 being his neighbours. But he has not done so. This conduct has to be taken note of.”

Karnataka Land Revenue Act | Deputy Commissioner Cannot Invoke Inherent Powers To 'Casually Rescind' 25 Yr Old Conversion Order: High Court

Case Title: C G Jagdish AND State of Karnataka

Case No: Writ Appeal No. 387 of 2023.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 459

The Karnataka High Court has held that inherent power vested under Section 25 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 with the Deputy Commissioner cannot be invoked casually to rescind orders of conversion of land.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed an appeal filed by C G Jagdish and said “The inherent power vested in a Revenue Court by virtue of Section 25 of the 1964 Act could not have been invoked, even if we agree that the order of conversion was statutorily appealable. A resort to inherent power is not like a drug of choice for a physician.”

Karnataka High Court Rejects Plea For Passport Renewal By Man Accused In Mother's Death, Says Short-Validity Passport Application May Be Considered

Case Title: Santhosh Beejadi Srinivas AND Union of India & Another

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.24269 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 460

The Karnataka High Court has upheld a decision of the passport authority rejecting the issuance of a regular passport (Valid for 10 years), to an accused charged with offences of murder and criminal conspiracy in the death of his mother.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna while deciding the petition said “the prayer for issuance of a regular passport/normal validity passport for 10 years is rejected. The impugned acknowledgement rejecting issuance of regular passport stands sustained.”

Hindu Marriage Act | Trial Court Must Wait 18 Months Before Dismissing Plea U/S 13B Even If Parties Trying To Reunite: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Srishti Daiv & ANR AND NIL

Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7146/2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 461

The Karnataka High Court has held that under Section 13B (2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, a couple seeking divorce had 18 months to report a settlement between them after filing the petition for divorce by mutual consent.

It further clarified that the trial court cannot on its own dismiss the petition without the request of the parties for such disposal. A division bench of Justice K S Mudagal and Justice K V Arvind allowed an appeal and set aside the order of the trial court dismissing the petition, and directed the parties to appear before the Bengaluru Mediation Centre.

No Fundamental Right To Do Business With State: High Court Dismisses Contractors' Plea Against Karnataka Govt's Call For Tenders Above ₹1 Crore

Case Title: Hangal Taluka Civil Contractors Association AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 104062 OF 2022 (GM-TEN) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 103437 OF 2022 WRIT PETITION NO. 103745 OF 2022 WRIT PETITION NO. 103755 OF 2022 WRIT PETITION NO. 104013 OF 2022.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 462

The Karnataka High Court has refused to interfere with the government's decision to issue tenders under the Amrutha Nagarothana Scheme, wherein various works are clubbed together and the value of each tender was allotted to be more than Rs.1 crore.

A single-judge bench of Justice M I Arun dismissed a batch of petitions filed by the Hangal Taluka Civil Contractors Association and Others.

It said “the State Government taking into consideration the works required is always at liberty to prescribe qualification of tenderers to ensure that contractors have the capacity and resources to successfully execute the work. No person can claim a fundamental right to carry on business with the Government.”

One Investor Cannot Accuse Another Investor Of Cheating If Business Runs Into Losses: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Ann Nimmi Sebastian v. State of Karnataka and Anr.

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9212 OF 2021 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4676 OF 2022

Citation No. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 463

The Karnataka High Court has held that an investor of a company cannot file case for cheating against another investor if he loses his money because the company suffered business losses.

A Single Judge Bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna made the observation, while allowing the plea of petitioners who were charged for offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 406, 403, 418 read with Section 34 of IPC. As per the allegations, the complainant paid Rs.1.29 crores to petitioner-Thomas Sebastian for commencement of a company, however, the company never took off.

Karnataka High Court Calls For Explanation From Trial Court Judge Who Failed To Comply With HC Directions To Conclude Trial By January 2023

Case Title: Chikkagundappa And State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.7657 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 464

The Karnataka High Court recently called for an explanation from the Trial Court for not obeying its direction of disposing of a criminal case registered against a man charged with the death of his wife, under Section 498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

A single judge bench of Justice V Srishananda had earlier called for an explanation for the delay in concluding the proceedings while hearing a successive bail application filed by the accused. Notably, although the Trial Court had been directed to dispose of the case within 31st January 2023, it was contended that the Trial itself had not commenced.

Karnataka High Court Dismisses Transfer Plea Of Woman Accused Under Section 138 of NI Act

Case Title: Renuka Yamunappa Golasangi v. Mohan Naik

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200690 OF 2023 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200697 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 465

The Karnataka High Court has rejected the plea of a senior citizen woman, accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act ("NI Act"), seeking transfer of case from one court to another.

A Single Judge Bench of Justice K Natarajan passed the order in a petition of accused-Renuka Yamunappa Golasangi, who sought transfer of her case from Sagara to Vijayapura.

The issue had arisen when the respondent filed complaints under Section 200 CrPC against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of NI Act. When this complaint was pending before the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Sagara, the petitioner moved an application for transfer.

Karnataka High Court Quashes Arms Act Case Against Man Flying From Mysuru To Chennai With Live Bullets In Carry-On Luggage

Case Title: Dr Jonathan Jaideep AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 14289 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 466

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a case registered under the Arms Act against a man who was flying from Mysuru to Chennai, with seven live bullets in his luggage, without any weapon.

A single-judge bench of Justice Hemant Chandangoudar allowed the petition filed by Dr Jonathan Jaideep and quashed the case registered against him under Section 25(1-B)(a) of the Arms Act.

It was alleged that on 26.12.2021, Indigo Airlines staff at Mysore Airport filed a complaint stating that at the time of checking the baggage of the petitioner, who was flying from Mysuru to Chennai, it was discovered by the airline officials that the shaving kit contained seven live bullets which were being carried without any weapon.

Karnataka HC Quashes Case Against Persons Charged With Threatening, Abusing Police Officials When Questioned On Keeping Hotel Open After 11:30 PM

Case Title: Syed Esa Ibrahim & ANR AND State By Channapatna East PS

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No. 10483 OF 2022

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 467

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a criminal case registered against two persons who allegedly abused police personnel with unparliamentary words, threatened them with dire consequences and restrained them from discharging their official duties when questioned for running their hotel business beyond 11.30 pm.

A single judge bench of Justice Hemant Chandangoudar allowed the petition filed by Syed Esa Ibrahim and Syed Mujahid Mehdi and quashed the case pending against them for offences under sections 341, 353, 506 and 114 r/w Section 34 of IPC.

High Court Directs Karnataka Chief Secretary To Constitute High-Level Committee For Constant Monitoring Of Storm Water Drains In Bangalore

Case Title: Avenue Supermarts LTD AND Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 3728 OF 2022 (LB-BMP) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 21441 OF 2022(LB-BMP) WRIT PETITION NO. 20383 OF 2023.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 468

The Karnataka High Court has directed the Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka to constitute a Committee comprising of officers such as the Chief Commissioner of the BBMP along with other Stakeholders like the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Principal Secretary, Gram Panchayat, for constant monitoring of storm water drains, more particularly in the rainy season, them from being blocked.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj said “This aspect being a perennial problem, it would be required that proper monitoring system of the drains constructed by the BBMP is maintained. In the event of any fresh storm water drains required to be constructed depending on the hydrological survey conducted by the BBMP, the BBMP through the state would always have the option to acquire the said land and form such storm water drains for the benefit of the citizens of Bangalore."

Karnataka High Court Allows Bail Plea By Accused In Journalist Gauri Lankesh's Murder

Case Title: Mohan Nayak N AND State of Karnataka

Case No: CRL.P.No.7963/2023

Citation No. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 469

The Karnataka High Court has granted bail to an accused involved in the murder of journalist Gauri Lankesh. The accused was alleged to be harbouring Accused nos.2 & 3 who murdered Lankesh by shooting her near her house and being a member of the syndicate involved in committing organised crimes.

On September 5, 2017, journalist and activist Gauri Lankesh was shot dead in front of her residence in south Bengaluru. The police have arrested 18 persons in the case. The first charge-sheet in the case was filed against Naveen Kumar on May 30. On November 23, 2018, the SIT submitted an additional 9,235-page chargesheet in the Principal Civil and Sessions court. The second chargesheet named 18 people as accused in the murder.

Bounden Duty Of Authority To Supply Details Of Detention & Translated Case Materials To Detenu: Karnataka HC Quashes Order Under Preventive Detention Act

Case Title: Mohammad Shafiulla AND The D. G. AND I.G.P. Of Police & Others

Case No: WPHC NO.75 OF 2023

Citation No. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 470

The Karnataka High Court has quashed an order of detention passed by the authorities against a detenu under the Karnataka Prevention Of Dangerous Activities Of Bootleggers, Drug-Offenders, Gamblers, Goondas, [Immoral Traffic Offenders, Slum-Grabbers And Video Or Audio Pirates] Act, 1985 ("Goonda Act/Preventive Detention Act").

One of the grounds for setting aside the order was the failure of authority to provide copies of documents relied on by it while passing the impugned order in a language known to the detenu. A division bench of Justice K Somashekhar and Justice Rajesh Rai K allowed the habeas corpus petition to produce the detenu before the Court and set him at liberty by quashing the impugned detention order.

BBMP Informs Karnataka High Court Of SOP To Be Followed For Felling Of Dangerous Trees

Case Title: Dr V L Nandish AND The Commissioner Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 17877 OF 2023

Citation No. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 471

Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) has adopted a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) guidelines/parameters to be followed by Tree Officers/Deputy Conservator of Forest, BBMP, for felling of dangerous trees.

A single-judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj was informed by the corporation that such a procedure would be followed henceforth. The bench recorded the submission and said “This court has not expressed any opinion on the validity or otherwise of the above SOP.”

'Husband's Avocation Has No Relevance To Candidate's Merit': Karnataka High Court Quashes Typist's Termination Order

Case Title: Anitha H And Principal District and Session Judge

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 12609 OF 2023

Citation No. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 472

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the termination order issued to a typist working at the Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class court, Davanagere for allegedly giving incorrect details about her husband's avocation during the selection process.

A single judge bench of Justice N S Sanjay Gowda allowed the petition and directed that the petitioner be reinstated to the post forthwith and be permitted to discharge her services as a Typist. The bench said “The avocation of the petitioner's husband would really have no relevance for comparing the relevant merit of the petitioner. Admittedly, the petitioner possessed the necessary merit and secured the post of Typist on the basis of her own merit and appointment was obviously not given to her on the basis of her husband's avocation.”

Police Assault On Advocate | Karnataka High Court Disposes PIL Noting Probe Handed To CID, Says State Taking Appropriate Steps

Case Title: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AND State of Karnataka

Case No: WP 26762/2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 473

The Karnataka High Court disposed of the suo-motu petition taken up acting on the representation made by the Advocates' Association of Bengaluru regarding the alleged incident of an advocate being assaulted by the police in Chikamanagaluru District.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit said “We see all necessary steps are taken by the state government. The investigation is handed to CID and the agency has initiated an investigation we see no reason to issue any further direction. The purpose of taking cognizance by this court represented by AAB is duly served and achieved its purpose. Accoridnly we see no reason to keep the petition pending in this court. Accordingly, it is disposed of.”

Denying Relationship With Deceased In Declaration Suit Not Defamation, Civil Court Must Decide Veracity Of Statements: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Yallappa & Another AND Kallavva Kuriyavar

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100331 OF 2023

Citation No. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 474

The Karnataka High Court has held that written statements filed by defendants before a civil court in a declaration suit, denying the relationship of plaintiffs with the deceased, would not amount to defamation.

A single-judge bench of Justice Shivashankar Amarannawar allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings initiated under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code by the respondents.

It said “I hold that this is not a case where the statements are per se defamatory so as to disallow the plea of good faith at this stage so as to allow the respondent to go ahead with the prosecution.”

High Court Grants Parole To Convict In Karnataka Church Attacks Case From 2000

Case Title: Mubeen Unnisa Begum AND State of Karnataka

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 16482 OF 2023

Citation No. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 475

The Karnataka High Court recently granted parole to Mohammed Akhil who has been convicted for his involvement in attacks on churches in Hubli and other parts of the state in the year 2000.

A single-judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by Mubeen Unnissa Begum, the wife of Akhil.

It noted that the petitioner was before the Court seeking the release of her husband on parole since she was suffering from ailments and requested the presence of her husband since her other family members were also aged and suffering from ailments themselves.

Karnataka High Court Issues Guidelines For Early Detection Of Pregnancy In Minor Rape Survivors, Protecting Their Health & Mental Wellbeing

Case Title: Ms X v State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No. 27563 OF 2023

Citation No. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 476

The Karnataka High Court has directed that immediately upon registration of a sexual offence under Section 376 of IPC or the POCSO Act, a medical examination of the victim must be made.

The Court directed for such medical examinations to ascertain amongst others—--if the victim was pregnant or not, the physical and mental status of the victim, and the ability to undergo the medical termination of the pregnancy, if needed, and aggravating factors which may impinge upon the health and wellbeing of the victim.

Helps Society If Student Has Extra Acumen: Karnataka High Court Directs ICAI To Grant Membership To Chartered Accountant Who Pursued Multiple Courses

Case Title: Nikkitha K J AND Union of India & others

Case No: Writ Petition No. 10759 of 2023.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 477

The Karnataka High Court has directed the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) to grant membership to practise as a Chartered Accountant to a 23-year-old who pursued multiple courses while pursuing the CA course.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by Nikkitha K J and said “I deem it appropriate to bend the arc of justice for a student and direct grant of Membership of the petitioner to the Institute without brooking any further delay.”

Karnataka Bank Not 'State' Under Article 12, Writ Petition Seeking Release Of Funds Held In Fixed Deposit Not Maintainable: High Court

Case Title: Rajesh Kumar Shetty And T Subbaya Shetty & ANR

Case No: Writ Petition No 11940 of 2023.

Citation No. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 478

The Karnataka High Court has held that a writ petition seeking a direction to release funds kept in Fixed Deposits with Karnataka Bank Ltd was not maintainable.

A single judge bench of Justice K V Aravind said “Writ petition is rejected as the same is not maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as the second respondent-Bank is not a "State" under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner is at liberty to seek appropriate remedy before the appropriate forum, in accordance with law, if so advised.”

Debts Recovery Tribunals, Civil/Criminal Courts Don't Have Powers To Impound Passports Of Citizens: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Nitin Kasliwal And Debt Recovery Tribunal I

Case No: Writ Petition No. 26333 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 479

The Karnataka High Court has held that the Debts Recovery Tribunal, or Civil/Criminal Courts and even the police do not have the power to impound the passport of a citizen.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said “The civil Court or the criminal Court itself do not have the power to impound the passport. Section 102 or 104 of the Cr.P.C. empowers the Police to seize and the Court to impound any document. Impounding of any document produced before the Court cannot stretch to an extent that those Courts can impound the passport also. The Court–either the criminal Court or the civil Court, issuing directions to deposit a passport before it till the conclusion of trial are those orders which are without authority of law. The Tribunal – Debts Recovery Tribunal can hardly have such power.”

'Cannot Entertain Truncated Plea Filed As PIL': Karnataka High Court Dismisses Plea Challenging Alleged Illegal Operation Of Special Trains

Case Title: Indian Rail Mazdoor Union And The Chairman And Chief Executive Officer Railway Board & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No. 24457 OF 2022.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 480

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation filed by the Indian Railway Mazdoor Union alleging misappropriation of Government money, regarding the illegal operation of special trains.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit said “On perusal of the Petition papers and the material annexed to the same, we are of the clear opinion that Petition is presented only on assumption, presumption and self impressions of the Petitioner.”

Constructed Building Becomes Exigible For Tax Only When Occupancy Certificate Issued: Karnataka High Court Quashes BBMP Demand Notice

Case Title: M/s B M Habitat AND The Commissioner And Competent Authority

Case No: Writ Petition No 28561 OF 2019

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 481

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a demand notice issued by the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) for payment of backdated property tax from 2008, on the ground that the building was completed even when the Occupancy Certificate came to be issued on 25.04.2011.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj allowed the petition filed by M/s B M Habitat and quashed the order issued by the corporation dated 15.02.2018 and it directed the corporation to receive the property tax commencing from 25.04.2011.

Notice Under Municipalities Act Not Mandatory When Seeking Declaration Of Title & Permanent Injunction Against Town Municipal Council: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Laxman Warad & Others AND Town Municipal Council

Case No: Regular Second Appeal No 3206 of 2007.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 482.

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that a prior notice under provisions of the Karnataka Municipalities Act is not mandatory while filing a declaratory suit of title and permanent injunction against the Town Municipal Council.

Section 284 (1) reads thus: 284. Previous notice for suits, etc.—(1) No suit shall be instituted against any municipal council, officer, servant or any person acting under the order or direction of such municipal council, officer or servant in respect of any act done or purporting to have been done in pursuance of this Act or any rule or bye-law made thereunder until the expiration of sixty days next after notice in writing, stating the cause of action, the nature of the relief sought, the amount of compensation claimed, the name and place of residence of the intending plaintiff and the relief which he claims, has been in the case of a municipal council delivered or left at its office, and in the case of such officer, servant, or person, delivered to him or left at his office or place of residence and unless the plaint contains a statement that such notice has been so delivered or left.

'Anganwadi Workers Render Yeomen Service But Not Paid Well': Karnataka HC Asks State Govt To Consider Enhancing Terminal Benefits To Them

Case Title: Karnataka Rajya Anganvadi Karya Kartheyara Mathu Sahaya AND Union of India & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 16212 OF 2012

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 483

The Karnataka High Court has directed the State government to consider a representation seeking to increase the terminal benefits from Rs.30,000 to Rs.50,000 and from Rs.50,000 to Rs.1,00,000, to the Anganawadi Workers and Helpers, respectively.

A single judge bench of Justice N S Sanjay Gowda gave the direction while disposing of a petition filed by Karnataka Rajya Anganvadi Karya Kartheyara Mathu Sahaya said “Such consideration shall be undertaken and completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioners are also permitted to furnish any additional representation if they so desire.”

Cheque Dishonour | Onus On Accused To Prove Cheque Issued Towards Repayment Of Loan Was Misused By Complainant: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Muddumadaiah And B Jyothi

Case No: Criminal Revision Petition No. 366 OF 2019

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 484

The Karnataka High Court has held that in a cheque bounce case, the onus is on the accused to prove that the cheque was misused after it was issued to another person in lieu of a loan borrowed from them and thus did not amount to a legally enforceable debt.

A single-judge bench of Justice Venkatesh Naik T dismissed the revision petition filed by the accused Muddumadaiah and upheld the conviction handed down under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

S.31 DV Act | Non-Payment Of Maintenance Arrears Not Prosecutable As Violation Of Protection Order: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Mohammed Yasin Naikwadi AND Aneesa Mohammed Yasin Naikwadi & ANR

Case No: Criminal Petition No 102231 OF 2023.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 485

The Karnataka High Court has held that a husband's non-payment of arrears to his wife and children would not invite prosecution under Section 31 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

A single judge bench of Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar quashed the proceedings initiated against Mohammed Yaseen Naikwadi and said “The approach of learned Magistrate in taking cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 31 of the D.V. Act is a glaring legal error and hence, the same will have to be set aside.”

Matter Of Legislative Policy: Karnataka High Court Dismisses Plea Seeking To De-Recognize Certain Communities As Scheduled Tribes

Case Title: Dr Ambedkar Scheduled Castes Federation Karnataka AND Union of India & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 26836 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 486

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation seeking to quash the enlistment of certain communities as Scheduled Tribes in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order (Second Amendment) Act, 1991 & the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order (Amendment) Act, 2020.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed the petition filed by Dr Ambedkar Scheduled Castes Federation Karnataka, through its President Mahendra Kumar Mitra.

Digitise, Credentialise Docs Including Khata Certificates, Tax Receipt With QR Code For E-Verification: Karnataka HC To BBMP

Case Title: Sharmada B K AND The Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 14352 of 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 487

The Karnataka High Court has suggested the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) to implement a system of digitising and credentialing all the documents which are issued by the Corporation including but not limited to a Khata certificate, plan sanction, tax paid receipt, SAS tax paid receipt etc. so that the QR Code is also printed which when scanned the website of the Corporation be visited to verify the authenticity thereof.

A single judge of Justice Suraj Govindaraj said “The Chief Commissioner, BBMP along with the Principal Secretary, E-governance, as also the concerned of digilocker are directed to look into the matter and formulate a suitable mechanism to credentialize all documents issued by the BBMP.”

Tenant May Bequeath Suit Property By Will Before Grant Of Occupancy Rights, Beneficiary Of Will Becomes Absolute Owner: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Mutti AND Kucharu & Others

Case No: Regular Second Appeal No 2272 of 2008.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 488

The Karnataka High Court has held that bequeathing property, by executing a will, by the tenant of the suit property is permitted before the grant of occupancy rights by the Land Tribunal. The beneficiary of the will in such instances will become the absolute and exclusive owner of the property, it observed.

A single judge bench of Justice Hanchate Sanjeevkumar allowed the appeal filed by one Mutti, who had challenged the order of the trial court and the first appellate court which had decreed the suit filed by petitioner Kucharu seeking partition and prayer to allot 1/6th share in the suit properties.

High Court Dismisses Plea Challenging Transfer Of Investigating Officer Probing Alleged Fraud Perpetrated In Karnataka Bhovi Development Corp

Case Title: Gulihatti D Shekar AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 16268 OF 2023.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 489.

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation questioning the transfer of investigating officer A.D.Nagaraju who is probing the alleged fraud of multiple crores of rupees which was allegedly perpetrated in the Karnataka Bhovi Development Corporation.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed the petition filed by Gulihatti D Shekar and said “The Government being the guardian of the public interest and being the principal employer knows, which official should be transferred to what place and which official should be retained for accomplishing the task. The officials come and go; the process however would continue unhindered.”

Karnataka High Court Quashes Corruption Case Against Former BJP MLA K Madal Virupakshappa

Case Title: K Madal Virupakshappa AND State of Karnataka

Case No: Writ Petition No 5633 of 2023.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 490

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a criminal prosecution initiated under the Prevention of Corruption Act, against former Bharatiya Janata Party legislator, K Madal Virupakshappa.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said “There is no allegation of ingredients of Section 7(a) and (b) of the Act against the petitioner. If there is not even a whisper of any demand or acceptance of bribe by the petitioner, it is ununderstandable as to how the proceedings can be permitted to be continued against him.”

Shocked That FRRO Converted Medical Attendant Visa To Medical Visa Without Verifying Documents: Karnataka HC Denies Visa Extension To Yemeni National

Case Title: Mohammed Noman Ahmed Almeri AND Union of India & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 15631 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 491

The Karnataka High court has refused to grant relief to a Yemeni national who had approached the court seeking a direction to the authorities to extend his visa.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna while dismissing the petition filed by Mohammed Noman Ahmed Almeri, rejected his contention that bilateral relations between Yemen and India, be kept in mind while considering the petition's merits.

Karnataka HC Allows Plea For Family Pension By 2nd Wife Of Deceased Railway Employee, Says Pension Rules Recognises Equal Share For Widows

Case Title: Pusha AND Y Jansi Rani

Case No: Writ Petition No 15979 of 2022.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 492

The Karnataka High Court has allowed a petition filed by the second wife of a railway employee seeking the release of 50% family pension by the authorities on the death of the employee in the course of employment.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by Pusha who had approached the court challenging the order dated 29-07-2022 passed by the trial court directing 50% of the pension to be paid to the 1st respondent (first wife) and her children while not answering the claim of the petitioner.

Long Service In Industrial Establishment Should Ordinarily Be Recognized As Advantageous To Workman: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: M/s SKF India Limited v. A V Nagabhushana

Case No: Writ Appeal No 997 of 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 493

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed an appeal challenging a Labour Court award, whereby an employee dismissed from service due to intermittent absence from work for attending to ailing relatives was ordered to be reinstated.

While dismissing the appeal, which was filed against the order of a Single Judge of the court that confirmed the award, the division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit took into account the fact that the employee had put in 20 years of service before the disciplinary proceedings were initiated.

NI Act | Promissory Note Conferring On Payer A Right To Recover As Per Law Does Not Dilute Unconditional Undertaking: Karnataka HC

Case Title: D L Ramesh v. Marilingaiah

Case No: Regular Second Appeal No 151 OF 2016

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 494

The Karnataka High Court has held that a mention in promissory note, that the payer is at liberty to proceed against the note creator's property if he fails to repay, is an additional condition that does not contravene Section 4 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which stipulates that a promissory note must contain an unconditional undertaking to pay.

A Single Judge Bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum dismissed an appeal filed by a defendant against order of the first appellate court, which reversed the decree of the Trial Court and allowed the plaintiff's suit seeking recovery of Rs.66,000 based on a promissory note.

BBMP Can't Refuse To Clear Contractor's Bill By Contending Documents Of Work Order Were Seized By Investigation Agencies: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: M/s Om SLV Constructions AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 3893 of 2023.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 495

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) cannot refuse to clear a Civil contractor's bill, by raising a contention that documents on the work/supply order granted to the contractor were seized by investigating agencies.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj said “The Departmental Head or Chief Commissioner of the Corporation could always seek for copies from a Court so also could an accused. In the present case, the petitioner also being an accused, the petitioner could make such an application. Instead of making such an application, the Corporation as also the petitioner have been blaming each other and neither having obtained copies to process the bills, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for aforesaid reliefs.”

Finance Act, 1984 | Civic Body Not Exempt From Paying Service Tax On Payments Made For Obtaining Third-Party Services: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Vasundhara A.G.K AND The Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 44252 OF 2015 (LB-BMP) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 48639 OF 2015(LB-BMP) WRIT PETITION NO. 48640 OF 2015

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 496

The Karnataka High Court has held that the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP)/civic body would not be exempted from the payment of service tax on payments made for availing third-party services to impart computer education to persons belonging to economically weaker sections.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj allowed the petitions filed by Vasundhara A.G.K and others and said “Respondent is directed to consider the representations submitted by the petitioners within a period of four weeks from today and calculate the service tax due on the amounts paid and payable by the respondent to the petitioners and release the said amounts to the petitioners within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.”

Father Attempting To Visit Daughter Does Not Tantamount To House Trespass If Mother Refuses To Comply With Visitation Rights: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Anupam Singh Tomar AND State By Kothanur Police & Another

Case No: Criminal Petition No 9997 OF 2022

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 497

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a case of criminal intimidation and trespass initiated by a woman against her former husband who visited her house to meet their daughter as per the visitation rights granted to him by the competent court.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed a plea under Section 482 of the CrPC by the petitioner who was charged under sections 504, 506 and 448 of the Indian Penal Code.

Reassessment Proceedings Can't Be In The Nature Of Review: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: EIT Services India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax

Case No.: Writ Petition No.15061/2013 (T-IT)

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 498

The Karnataka High Court has held that reassessment proceedings cannot be in the nature of review.

The bench of Justice S. Sunil Dutt Yadav has observed that the material that has come to light in the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 2008–2009 cannot be sufficient grounds to resort to reassessment proceedings.

The petitioner/assessee has challenged the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, seeking to reassess the income that has escaped assessment in terms of Section 147 with respect to the assessment year 2005–2006. The assessee was called upon to deliver a return within 30 days. Subsequently, the reasons for initiating proceedings under Section 147 for reopening the assessment were communicated.

Karnataka High Court Directs NFAC To Refund Rs.29.30 Cr. With Interest To Myntra

Case Title: M/S Myntra Designs Private Limited Versus National Faceless Assessment Centre

Case No.: Writ Petition No. 19995 Of 2023 (T-IT)

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 499

The Karnataka High Court has directed the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) to refund Rs. 29.30 crore with interest under Section 244A of the Income Tax Act to Myntra Designs Pvt. Ltd.

The bench of Justice B. M. Shyam Prasad has observed that if indeed a reference to the transfer pricing officer is under investigation, it would suffice for this Court to observe that if the adjudication, after due process, results in a demand, the petitioner, Myntra, will have to answer the demand, but in anticipation of a conclusion for a demand without even recording the reasons, the petitioner cannot be denied the refund.

Appellant Required To Disprove Order U/S 45A Of Employees State Insurance Act, One Year Substantial Oppurtunity For Compliance: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: M/s GROUP 4 SECURITAS GUARDING LIMITED AND The Regional Director, ESI Corporation.

Case No: Miscellaneous First Appeal No 7749/2013

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 500

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed an appeal by Group 4 Securitas questioning the order of the Employees State Insurance Court, wherein it rejected the application of the appellant that it was not liable to pay a contribution of Rs.65,20,855.18 determined by the ESI Corporation. A Division bench of Justice K S Mudagal and Justice Ramachandra D Huddar dismissed the appeal with a cost of Rs 1 lakh, payable to the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority.

Plea Of Parity Not Binding On Court To Grant Bail To Accused, Individual Offences/ Overt Acts Are To Be Assessed: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Almas Pasha AND The State Of Karnataka

Case No: Criminal Petition No 11041 of 2023.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 501

The Karnataka High Court has said that the plea of parity raised by an accused in seeking bail is not binding on the court and individual offences and individual overt acts are to be assessed and not to simply follow orders of other accused who are enlarged on bail and on parity grant the same. A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna made the observation while rejecting the second bail application filed by one Almas Pasha who is charged for offence murder (Section 302 IPC).

'Practising Medicine Without Qualification & Hoodwinking Rural People': Karnataka HC Denies Registration To 'Doctor' Who Studied Paramedical Course

Case Title: Dr. Annaiah N AND State of Karnataka & others.

Case No. Writ Petition No. 23267/2023.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 502.

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a plea to quash an endorsement by the state authorities refusing to issue a registration certificate under the Karnataka Private Medical Establishments Act to a person who pursued para-medical studies and was practising as a doctor for several years at his clinic.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said “It is rather strange as to how the petitioner addresses himself as a practising doctor for all these years. Time has come to pull the curtain down on such people who are practising medicine without qualification and hoodwinking poor people in rural areas.”

Bank Can't Forfeit More Than 25% Deposit Made By Auction Purchaser Who Fails To Deposit Remaining Amount: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Kalyanamurthy K AND State Bank of India

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.23327/2022

Citation No. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 503

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that a bank cannot forfeit over 25% of the deposit amount made by an auction purchaser who fails to deposit the remaining purchase amount within the stipulated period for completion of the sale. A single judge bench of Justice K V Aravind directed the State Bank of India to refund a sum of Rs.10,00,000, along with applicable interest from the date of payment till refund, within eight weeks to one Kalyanamurthy K.

Appellant Not Required To Deposit 10% Of Entire Disputed Amount Including Penalty, Fine, Interest: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: M/S Tejas Arecanut Traders Versus Joint Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

Case No.: Writ Petition No. 104505 Of 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 504

The Karnataka High Court has set aside the order passed by the Appellate Authority to deposit 10% of the entire amount in dispute, which included tax, interest, a fine, a fee, and a penalty.

The bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum has observed that while filing the appeal under Section 107(6) of the GST Act, the appellant is required to deposit only 10% of the disputed tax amount and not 10% of the entire disputed amount, including penalty, fine, and interest.