Karnataka High Court Monthly Digest: June 2024 [Citations 243-290]

Nominal Index:

Jithendra Kumar N M AND T Gururaj. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 243

Amit Chougule AND Megha. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 244

K B Lokesh & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 245

V.S.S VISHNU SENA SANGHATANE & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 246

Shany Jose AND The Union of India & others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 247

Vivek Jain AND The Deputy Commissioner & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 248

Rasheedabanu Mohammed Goush Kwati & ANR AND Ashpakaahamad Abdulasab Mulla & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 249

Neetha G AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 250

Vijaya Bank AND M Ravindra Shetty. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 251

Palaniswamy Veeraraja & Others AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 252

Annegowda AND State By Yeshvanthapura Police Station & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 253

H Channaiah Vs Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Panchayath And Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 254

City Municipal Council Channapatna AND Siddaramu & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 255. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 256

Santhosh Shetty & Others AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 257

Rev. Devaraj Bangera And State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 258

X AND Karnataka Medical Council & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 259

M/s Akhila Karnataka Hindu Temples Priest Agamikas and Archaks Association And State of Karnataka & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 260

Dr Chethan Kumar S AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 261

C B Prakash & ANR AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 262

Nikil Sankla AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 263

Uemsha T N and Ors vs. State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 264

Mrs X AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 265

Alla Baksha Patel AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 266

Invest Karnataka Forum & ANR and M/s BBP Studio Virtual Bharath Pvt. Ltd & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 267

ABC AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 268

Bhavani Revanna AND State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 269

Vijayalakshmi H S AND Principal Secretary & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 270

Lakkamma & Others AND Jayamma. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 271

Sagad Kareem Ismael AND Union of India & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 272

P Reethi Mune Gowda AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 273

Parvathamma M AND Chandrakala V. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 274

ABC & ANR AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 275

A M Harish Gowda AND Chaluvaraju H S. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 276

G Nagaraju AND The Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 277

Paras Jain AND Karnataka State Bar Council & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 278

Karnataka Food And Civil Supplies Corporation Limited & Others AND Veena M. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 279

S R Bellary & State of Karnataka & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 280

G. Ramesh. v. The Karnataka State Seeds Corporation Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 281

Dhanashree Ravindra Pandit AND The Income Tax Department. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 282

Manikanta @ Puli AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 283

Mathikere Jayaram Shantharam AND Pramod C. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 284

M R Nagarajan AND The Syndicate Bank & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 285

Aravinda Reddy AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 286

WORKMEN OF BEML LTD & Others AND Union of India & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 287

Smt. Sowmya S. Versus ITO. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 288

Centre for Wildlife Studies AND Union of India & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 289

Gurunath Vadde AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 290

Judgments/Orders

[S.139 NI Act] Presumption Is In Favour Of Complaint If Accused In Reply Notice Admits Availment Of Loan: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Jithendra Kumar N M AND T Gururaj

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2158/2018

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 243

The Karnataka High Court has held that there is presumption in favour of the complainant under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, when in the reply notice issued by the accused to the complainant the transaction of availment of loan is admitted again calling upon the complainant to prove the transaction does not arise at all.

A single-judge bench of Justice Rajendra Badamikar reversed the order dated 30.08.2018 passed by the trial court acquitting accused T Gururaj who was charged with the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act.

Husband Who Has Deserted Wife And Child Is Bound To Pay Maintenance Irrespective Of Financial Status: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Amit Chougule AND Megha

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.102123 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 244

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by a husband questioning the interim maintenance granted to the estranged and minor child by the trial court.

A single judge bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum dismissed the contention of the husband that he is unemployed as he has lost his job. He is not in a position to pay maintenance as he has no independent source of income.

The court said “If the petitioner has deserted the wife irrespective of his financial status, he is bound to maintain his wife and minor children. The petitioner under the garb that he has lost his employment, cannot shy away from his responsibility of maintaining the wife and minor daughter.”

State Can't Extract Additional Work And Not Pay: Karnataka High Court Orders State To Pay Licensed Surveyors As Per 2008 GO

Case Title: K B Lokesh & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 1267 OF 2014.

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 245

The Karnataka High Court has come to the aid of 1131 licensed surveyors in the Department of Survey, Settlement and Land Records, by directing the State government to settle their claims and pay to them the remuneration in terms of Government Order dated 12.08.2008, after ascertaining the additional work done by them.

As per the government order it was decided to pay Rs.500 for Tatkaal Phodi Work and enhancement of Pre-Mutation Sketch Fee from Rs.403 to Rs.600. This Order was issued as a matter of Government Policy for catering to the needs of agriculturists, subject to them paying the prescribed fees for tapping the services of the appellants.

Construction Of Memorial For Film Actor Cannot Be Subject Matter Of PIL: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: V.S.S VISHNU SENA SANGHATANE & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WP 29408/2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 246

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday dismissed a public interest litigation seeking directions to the state government to grant 10 guntas of land for construction of a memorial for late Kannada film actor Dr Vishnuvardhan, on the land where he has been cremated in 2009.

A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind said, “Construction of memorial of a film star cannot become subject matter of public interest litigation. It is difficult to visualise as to what public interest will be achieved by the petitioner insisting for grant of land for the said purpose.”

Karnataka High Court Asks Centre To Consider Representation For Release Of Passport Of Nurse Who Travelled From Yemen Despite Ban

Case Title: Shany Jose AND The Union of India & others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.8969 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 247

The Karnataka High Court has directed the Regional Passport officer to consider and pass necessary orders within four weeks on the representation to be made by a qualified nurse for return of her passport, which came to be seized as she had travelled from Yemen in violation of a 2017 government notification issued citing national security concerns amid India's strained relationship with the country.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna partly allowed a petition filed by one Shany Jose who had approached the court seeking a direction for release of her passport, which was seized and withheld by the respondents in terms of the seizure memo dated 20-08-2023.

Gift Deed Executed By Senior Citizen Father In Favour Of Son Can't Be Cancelled If Condition Of Upkeep By Son Is Not Mentioned: Karnataka High Court (livelaw.in)

Case Title: Vivek Jain AND The Deputy Commissioner & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.14704 OF 2021

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 248

The Karnataka High Court has held that a gift deed executed by a senior citizen in favour of his son releasing his property who subsequently sells it, cannot be cancelled by the Assistant Commissioner of Senior Citizen Tribunal, if there is no condition mentioned in the gift deed of maintaining the father (donor).

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by one Vivek Jain who had purchased the property from CS Harsha, who was gifted the property by his father Srinivas in the year 2019.

Non-Alienating Members Of Joint Family Cannot Be Impleaded In Suit Filed For Specific Performance Of Contract: Karnataka High Court

Case Tile: Rasheedabanu Mohammed Goush Kwati & ANR AND Ashpakaahamad Abdulasab Mulla & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 100847 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 249

The Karnataka High Court has held that even if the property which is the subject matter of the agreement to sell is the ancestral property, non-alienating members of a joint family have no locus to contest the suit for specific performance.

A single judge bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum sitting at Dharwad bench dismissed the petition filed by Rasheedabanu Mohammed Goush Kwati and another challenging the order of the trial court dismissing their application seeking impleadment.

Karnataka High Court Releases Life Convict On Parole After Wife Files Plea Claiming She Was Being Deprived Of Her Right Of Progeny

Case Title: Neetha G AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.11827 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 250

The Karnataka High Court has allowed a petition filed by a wife seeking parole leave for her husband who is a life convict on the ground that she is deprived of her right of progeny.

A single judge bench of Justice S R Krishna Kumar allowed the petition of the woman in part and granted general parole for a period of 30 days to the convict which would become operational from 05.06.2024 to 04.07.2024.

Opinion Given By CVC To Disciplinary Authority Need Not Be Shared With Delinquent Employee Of Bank: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Vijaya Bank AND M Ravindra Shetty

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 7791 OF 2003

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 251

The Karnataka High Court, while reversing an order of the Single bench directing reinstatement of a delinquent bank employee who was dismissed from service for lending money to fictitious persons without duly securing repayment of loans, has observed that the opinion given by the Central Vigilance Commission to the disciplinary authority need not be shared with the employee.

A division bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice Ramachandra D Huddar allowed the appeal filed by Vijaya Bank and agreed with its contention that no error has been committed by the management in taking the opinion of Central Vigilance Officer inasmuch as such a course is internalised vide Regulation 19 of Vijaya Bank Officer Employees' (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1981.

It said, “The CVC is constituted under Section 3 of the Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003 and it has statutory duties. One such duty is to advice the banks in matters of disciplinary proceedings. We do not subscribe to the views of learned Single Judge that the vigilance opinion should always be shared with the delinquent employee and that his say should be had on that. The object of consulting the Vigilance Commission is not in the interest of the employee but in the larger interest of the banking institution. There is no scope for assuming the contra position, in the absence of any such indication in the Regulations. In taking this view, we are mindful of the presumption that the principles of natural justice are not ordinarily excluded.”

Police Has Jurisdiction To Investigate Where Documents Forged Locally For Submitting To Foreign Court, Private Complaint Maintainable: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Palaniswamy Veeraraja & Others AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4624 OF 2022

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 252

The Karnataka High Court has held that a private complaint filed before a court in Bengaluru complaining about forged documents being submitted by a party before a foreign court is maintainable.

A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan dismissed a petition filed by Palaniswamy Veeraraja and others seeking to quash criminal proceedings initiated against them based upon the private complaint for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 468, 471, 420 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. It said, “The documents were created by the accused who were in Bangalore and running the company at Bangalore. Therefore, the Bangalore Police has jurisdiction to investigate the matter and file the charge sheet.”

Accused Need Not Be Heard By Magistrate Before Directing Police To Carry Out Further Investigation U/S 173(8) CrPC: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Annegowda AND State By Yeshvanthapura Police Station & Others

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9009 OF 2021

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 253

The Karnataka High Court has held that the Magistrate court has the power to direct further investigation in a case and merely because the Magistrate did not given any notice to the accused while directing the police to further investigate the matter, that itself is not a ground to quash the order for further probe.

A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan dismissed the petition filed by Aneegowda, challenging the order of the Magistrate dated 26.3.2021 against the application filed by the Investigating Officer under Section 173 (8) of Cr.P.C, permitting for further investigation in the case registered against the accused charged for the offences punishable under Sections 201 and 420 of IPC.

Leave Encashment Not Discretionary Bounties But Legal Rights Enforceable Under Constitution: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: H Channaiah Vs Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Panchayath And Ors

Case No.- WRIT PETITION NO.5016 OF 2024 (S-R)

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 254

A single judge bench of the Karnataka High Court comprising of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum in the case of H Channaiah Vs Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Panchayath And Ors has held that Leave encashment cannot be viewed as discretionary bounties but as legal rights enforceable under the Constitution of India

Judges Not "Mughals", Can't Transcend Law To Do Justice: Karnataka HC Refuses To Extend Disabled Shop Owner's Lease Beyond Statutory Limit

Case Title: City Municipal Council Channapatna AND Siddaramu & ANR

Case No: WA NO.1983 OF 2016

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 255

The Karnataka High Court has set aside a single bench order which directed the City Municipal Council of Channapatna to extend the lease of a shop allotted to a disabled person to 20 years, instead of the stipulated 12-years lease period.

A division bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice Ramachandra D Huddar allowed the appeal filed by the Council by citing a Government Circular dated 26.10.2009 which prescribes a maximum period of 12 years lease of these properties for disabled persons under the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964. It said, “The learned Single Judge could not have lightly construed such an instrument of law to the prejudice of public interest and conversely to the advantage of a private citizen. No writ can be issued in derogation of law. Writ Courts in the guise of doing justice cannot transcend the barriers of law, to say the least. Obviously, they cannot arrogate to themselves the extraordinary power vested in the Apex Court of the country under Article 142 of the Constitution. After all, we are Judges and therefore, cannot act like mughals of a bygone era. More is not necessary to specify.”

Minor Involved in Accident: Owner Liable, 'Pay and Recover' Not Applicable | Rules Karnataka High Court

Case Title: The New India Assurance Co Ltd AND Bibi Nafisa & Others

Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.7683 OF 2014(MV-D) C/W MFA CROSS OBJECTION NO. 54 OF 2020

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 256

The Karnataka High Court has held that the principle of pay and recover is not applicable in case a minor boy drives the vehicle and causes the accident. In such cases, the owner of the vehicle alone shall pay the compensation to the claimants and not the Insurance Company, it held.

A single judge bench of Justice Hanchate Sanjeev Kumar allowed the appeal filed by The New India Assurance Co Ltd and set aside the order of the tribunal dated 11.08.2014 insofar as it relates to fastening liability on the Insurance Company to pay compensation.

'No False Promise Of Marriage': Karnataka High Court Quashes Rape Case Filed By Woman Against Her Fiancee And His Family Members After Wedding Was Called Off

Case Title: Santhosh Shetty & Others AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.13912 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 257

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a rape case registered by a woman against her would-be husband alleging that after the betrothal ceremony on the promise of marriage the accused had forced the complainant to indulge in sexual intercourse and seven months later refused to marry.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by Santosh Shetty and his family members who were charged with offences punishable under sections 376, 471, 420, 109, 504 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Manipulated Birth Certificate To Continue As Head Of Church For One More Year? Karnataka High Court Orders Imprisonment Till Rising Of Court

Case Title: Rev. Devaraj Bangera And State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.67 OF 2015

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 258

The Karnataka High Court recently upheld the order of conviction handed down by the trial court to a retired head of a church who had manipulated his date of birth certificate so as to get the benefit of continuing to be head of the church for one more year.

A single judge bench of Justice V Srishananda however upon noting that offence was committed almost 20 years ago in 2004 and accused is aged 80-years, modified the prison term of three years and directed the accused to undergo simple imprisonment for a day till raising of the Court.

Karnataka High Court Declines Wife's Plea To Examine Husband Allegedly Diagnosed With 'Missing Brain' Condition Amidst Pending Divorce Case

Case Title: X AND Karnataka Medical Council & ANR

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.4617 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 259

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by a doctor-wife questioning the rejection of her application by the Karnataka Medical Council wherein she had sought to appoint an Expert Committee to examine her husband, also a doctor, who was allegedly diagnosed as suffering from a porencephalic cyst (missing brain).

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed the petition filed by the estranged wife. However, it clarified that the issue could be kept open to be urged at a later point in time if the need arises.

Karnataka High Court Dismisses PIL Seeking Declaration That Temples Are Not Public Authorities Under RTI Act

Case Title: M/s Akhila Karnataka Hindu Temples Priest Agamikas and Archaks Association And State of Karnataka & Anr

Case No: WP 8722/2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 260

The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday dismissed a public interest litigation filed seeking a declaration that temples in the State of Karnataka are not public authorities within the meaning of section 2 (h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind dismissed the petition filed by M/s Akhila Karnataka Hindu Temples Priests Agamikas and Archaks Association.

Patient's Vulnerability Can't Be Used As A Weapon To Sexually Exploit Them: Karnataka High Court Declines Relief To Doctor Accused Of Sexual Harassment

Case Title: Dr Chethan Kumar S AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4868 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 261

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by a doctor seeking to quash an offence registered against him under Section 354-A (Sexual Harassment) on the complaint lodged by a patient.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said “A doctor should remember that the patients seek their help when they are in a vulnerable state – when they are sick, when they are needy and when they are uncertain about the needs to be done. The unequal distribution of power in the doctor-patient relationship may give rise to opportunities of sexual exploitation. This vulnerability should not be used as a weapon by the doctors, misusing the trust the patient reposes in the doctor.”

[S.498A IPC] Scores Of Cases Where Husband's Family Is Dragged Into Web Of Crime By Frivolous Complaints Of Wife, Must Be Nipped In The Bud: Karnataka HC

Case Title: C B Prakash & ANR AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6995 OF 2022

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 262

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a case under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code registered by a woman against her father and mother-in-law.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna while allowing the petition filed by C B Prakash and another said “There are scores and scores of cases where allegations are made that have pointed overt acts by every member of the family which are sustained and further trial is permitted. There are even scores and scores of cases where every member of the family without rhyme or reason is dragged into the web of crime by frivolous complaints registered by the complainant/wife while the entire grievance is against the husband and every imaginary member of the family is dragged in. It is these cases which are to be nipped in the bud.”

POCSO Act: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail To Youth Accused Citing Chances Of Coming In Contact With Hardcore Criminals In Custody

Case Title: Nikil Sankla AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4209 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 263

The Karnataka High Court recently granted bail to a 20-year-old who allegedly, after having chats with a minor girl over Instagram, took her intimate photos, committed sexual assault and started blackmailing the victim and her family members.

A single judge bench of Justice M G Uma allowed the bail petition observing that “The petitioner is hardly aged 20 years. If he is detained in custody, there is every possibility of him coming in contact with hardcore criminals, which is not in the best interest of the petitioner.”

Employees Can't Be Regularized If Employment Was Based On Outsourcing Contracts, Not Intended To Create Permanent Employment: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Uemsha T N and Ors vs. State of Karnataka

Case No. : WP No. 19588 of 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 264

A single judge bench of the Karnataka High Court comprising Justice N S Sanjay Gowda, while deciding Writ Petition in the case of Uemsha T N and Ors vs. State of Karnataka, held that employees cannot be granted permanent status if their employment was through outsourcing contracts that were not meant to establish permanent positions.

Victim Of Prostitution Cannot Be Prosecuted U/S 5 Immoral Traffic Prevention Act: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Mrs X AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 807 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 265

The Karnataka High Court has held that a woman who is a victim of prostitution cannot be punished for offences punishable under Section 5 of the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by a woman who had been charged under the provision and said, “The provisions, the purpose or the object of the Act is not to abolish prostitution or the prostitute. There is no provision under the law, which penalises a victim who indulges in prostitution. What is punishable is sexual exploitation for commercial purposes and to earn or make a living upon it against such person/s.”

Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash FIR For Outraging Woman's Modesty By Writing Her Mobile Number On Toilet Wall

Case Title: Alla Baksha Patel AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1995 OF 2022

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 266

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against a man who allegedly wrote the number of a married woman on the walls of gents toilet at Majestic bus stand, Bangalore, calling her “a call girl” following which she started receiving unexpected calls at odd hours from various numbers who also threatened to her life.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed the petition filed by Alla Baksha Patel and said “In today's digital age one need not cause physical harm, a woman's modesty can be railroaded by sheer circulation of pejorative statements, pictures or videos in the social media. It is therefore, when such cases are projected before this Court seeking quashment, it should not be interfered with, but be dealt with a stern manner. The petitioner has indulged in one of the ingredients of such insult by fresco or a writing on the wall. He, therefore, cannot get away with making such belittling comments on a woman in public.”

Court In Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Enter Arena Of Interpretation Of Contractual Terms: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Invest Karnataka Forum & ANR and M/s BBP Studio Virtual Bharath Pvt. Ltd & Anr

Case No: C.C.C NO.495 OF 2023 (CIVIL) C/W WRIT APPEAL NO.1095 OF 2023 (GM-RES) AND WRIT APPEAL NO.1266 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 267

The Karnataka High Court has set aside an order passed by the Single judge bench by which it directed the State government to release balance payments due to M/s BBP Studio Virtual Bharat Pvt Ltd, which was appointed to produce a 3D film during the Global Investors Meet, in November 2022, but the contract was cancelled last minute as the film did not meet required parameters.

A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice Krishna S Dixit allowed the appeal filed by Invest Karnataka Forum and the State of Karnataka and said “It is difficult to agree with the view of the learned Single Judge.”

Consensual Relationship Is No Licence To Assault A Woman: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: ABC AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6913 OF 2022

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 268

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash charges of assault levelled by a woman against a man with whom she was in a consensual relationship for years.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said, “Any amount of consensus or a consensual relationship between the accused and the complainant will not become a licence to the accused to assault a woman.”

Kidnapping Case:Karnataka HC Grants Pre-Arrest Bail to Prajwal Revanna's Mother

Case Title: Bhavani Revanna AND State of Karnataka

Case No: Criminal Petition No 5125/2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 269

The Karnataka High Court today granted anticipatory bail to Bhavani Revanna, Prajwal Revanna's mother, who has been charged with kidnapping a woman.

A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit while pronouncing the order remarked, "I have marched a step forward in protecting a woman from unnecessary or avoidable custody. In our social setup they are hub of the family."

Teachers Mould Fate Of A Nation And Play Pivotal Role In Nation Building: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Vijayalakshmi H S AND Principal Secretary & Others

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 1429 OF 2016

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 270

The Karnataka High Court has allowed an appeal filed by a teacher and directed the State Higher Education Department to give effect to the Management's order of her absorption as a full-time lecturer in the institution.

A division bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice Ramchandra D Huddar allowed the appeal filed by Vijayalakshmi H S and said “Absorption would secure favourable conditions of service to the teachers and that in turn would proliferate their interest in the discharge of their duties. It hardly needs to be stated that it is the teachers that mould the fate of a Nation and they play a pivotal role in Nation building.”

Court Must Consider Time Limit In Agreement In Suit For Specific Performance, Need Not Decide Suit Merely Because It Was Filed Within Limitation Period: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Lakkamma & Others AND Jayamma

Case No: REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 6 OF 2013

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 271

The Karnataka High Court has held that while exercising discretion in a suit for specific performance, the court need not decree the suit merely because it is filed within the period of limitation, by ignoring time limits stipulated in the agreement.

A division bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice Ramchandra D Huddar allowed the appeal filed by the Lakkamma @Lakshmamma and others and set aside the trial court order dated 20th October 2012, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff Jayamma against the appellants for the relief of specific performance of the suit agreement dated 02.08.2007.

Foreign Nationals Cannot Execute Special Power Of Attorney For Filing Writ Petitions Before Indian Courts: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Sagad Kareem Ismael AND Union of India & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 11952 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 272

The Karnataka High Court recently held that a foreign national cannot execute a Special Power of Attorney (SPA) sitting elsewhere in the globe for the purpose of filing a writ petition invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India, before any courts in India.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed the petition filed by Sagad Kareem Ismael a native of Iraq who had approached the court through SPA with a prayer directing the respondents to consider the Visa application dated 22-02-2024 and grant him an entry for his medical treatment into the country.

[Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act] 15-Months Time For Moving No-Confidence Motion Commences When President Assumes Office: High Court

Case Title: P Reethi Mune Gowda AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO.1508 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 273

The Karnataka High Court has held that the fifteen-month period for calling for a no-confidence motion under Section 49(1) of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, is to be counted from the date of election not of the first President but from the date when the new President in the middle of the term of the Panchayat assumes office.

A Division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice Krishna S Dixit allowed an appeal filed by one P Reethi Mune Gowda, and set aside the order of the single judge bench which had held that she had assumed the office of Bengaluru Grama Panchayat, from when the election results were declared. Since fifteen months expired on 26.05.2023 counted from the date 27.12.2021 when the first President was elected, there was no prohibition for moving the no-confidence motion.

[Cheque Dishonour] Merely Raising Doubt Without Adducing Credible Evidence Not Sufficient To Rebut Presumption U/S 113 Of NI Act: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Parvathamma M AND Chandrakala V

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 508 OF 2015

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 274

The Karnataka High Court has said that the presumption against an accused under Section 113 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is a rebuttable presumption, but the said rebuttable presumption must be rebutted by adducing credible evidence, and merely raising a doubt is not sufficient.

A single judge bench of Justice Ramachandra D Huddar made the observation while allowing the appeal filed by Parvathamma M and setting aside the order passed by the trial court acquitting accused Chandrakala V, who was charged under Section 138 of the Act.

Husband's Paramour Is Not Relative Or Family Member, Cannot Be Dragged Into Proceedings U/S 498A IPC: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: ABC & ANR AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 88 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 275

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a criminal case registered under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code by a woman against the paramour of her husband.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by the woman and her mother who were arrayed as accused in the case registered under sections 498A, 323, 324, 307, 420, 504, 506 and 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

[Cheque Dishnonour] Accused Must Place Evidence To Prove Claim That Complainant Misused Cheque Issued To Another Person: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: A M Harish Gowda AND Chaluvaraju H S

Case No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.619 OF 2021

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 276

The Karnataka High Court has upheld the order of conviction handed down to an accused who was charged under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

A single judge bench of Justice V Srishananda while dismissing the petition filed by A M Harish Gowda, turned down his contention that the cheque issued in favour of one Prabhakar had been misused by the complainant Chaluvaraju H to file a false case against the accused.

The court said, “It is pertinent to note that said Prabhakar is not even examined on behalf of the accused, nor any material like counterfoil or cheque issuing register is placed on record so as to establish that the cheque has been issued in favour of Prabhakar.”

S.29-C Karnataka Co-Operative Societies Act | No Ground To Interfere With Disqualification Of Director Who Failed To Repay Loan: High Court

Case Title: G Nagaraju AND The Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 13892 OF 2020

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 277

The Karnataka High Court has upheld the order passed by the authorities disqualifying the Director of Janagere Primary Agricultural Credit Co-operative Society Ltd on the grounds that the petitioner was a defaulter not having cleared his loan dues to the Society as on the relevant date when he was elected.

A single judge bench of Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav dismissed the petition filed by G Nagaraju and said “The clearing of dues only on 01.06.2020 after the petitioner was elected makes out a case for disqualification.”

Karnataka High Court: Allegations of Professional Misconduct Against Advocate Invalid if Not Filed By Client

Case Title: Paras Jain AND Karnataka State Bar Council & ANR

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.20076 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 278

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a notice issued by the State Bar Council to a 71-year-old Advocate pursuant to 'professional misconduct' allegations levelled against him by the opposite party in a suit, i.e. the judgment debtor.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by Advocate Paras Jain, and said, “The complainant (A Ramachandra Reddy) had no locus to file the complaint against the petitioner, as he (petitioner) was neither his (complainant's) Advocate nor there was any engagement of the petitioner by the 2nd respondent at any point in time. He was the counsel who had appeared against the 2nd respondent. The complaint, at best, was maintainable by the decree holders, if there was any allegation against the petitioner and not at the instance of Judgment Debtor.”

Political Influence By Public Servants In Transfer And Posting May Be Sole Ground For Denial Of Relief By Constitutional Court: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Karnataka Food And Civil Supplies Corporation Limited & Others AND Veena M

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 1534 OF 2016

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 279

The Karnataka High Court has deprecated the act of public servants causing political influence in a matter of their transfer and postings and said it may constitute a sole ground for declining relief.

A Division bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice Ramachandra D Huddar allowed the appeal filed by Karnataka Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Limited and set aside a single judge bench order which had directed reinstatement of Veena M in service without back wages & consequential benefits, although continuity of service was granted for the limited purpose of retirement accruals.

Karnataka High Court Upholds Govt Resolution Suspending Quarrying Leases Falling Within 1 Km Of Kappathgudda Wildlife Sanctuary

Case Title: S R Bellary & State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NOS.25653/2022 C/W 25654/2022, 25655/2022, 25660/2022, 25680/2022, 12221/2023, 12229/2023, 17716/2023 AND 17912/2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 280

The Karnataka High Court has upheld a government resolution dated 29th September 2022 which suspend fourteen quarry leases located within one kilometre boundary of Kappathgudda Wildlife Sanctuary.

A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed the petition filed by SR Bellary and others against the resolution passed by District Task Force Committee (Mines), Gadag District.

It said,“The Kappatgudda Wildlife Sanctuary is a notified Sanctuary and the distance of one kilometre has to be observed, treating it as a prohibited area in which mining activities cannot be allowed. It is also to be noted that the preservation of one kilometre from the protected area is irrespective of the eco-sensitive zone Notification.”

Karnataka HC:Absence Without Leave Constitutes Misconduct in Industrial Employment

Case: Shri G. Ramesh. v. The Karnataka State Seeds Corporation Ltd.

Case No. W.P. (C). No. 36199/2014

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 281

A single judge bench of the Karnataka High Court comprising of Justice Jyoti Mulimani while deciding a writ petition in the case of Shri G. Ramesh. v. The Karnataka State Seeds Corporation Ltd. has held that absence without leave constitutes misconduct in industrial employment and justifies disciplinary punishment.

Karnataka HC:Black Money Act Can't Apply Retrospectively for Foreign Asset Disclosure

Case Title: Dhanashree Ravindra Pandit AND The Income Tax Department

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.101368 OF 2019 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION No.101369 OF 2019 CRIMINAL PETITION No.101370 OF 2019 CRIMINAL PETITION No.101371 OF 2019 CRIMINAL PETITION No.101372 OF 2019 CRIMINAL PETITION No.101373 OF 2019 CRIMINAL PETITION No.101374 OF 2019 CRIMINAL PETITION No.101375 OF 2019

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 282

The Karnataka High Court has quashed criminal prosecution initiated under Section 50 of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) Imposition of Tax Act, 2015, against several businessmen who were charged for violations alleged to have been committed years before the Act came into force.

The provision penalises assessee's failure to furnish any information of an asset located outside India, including financial interest.

Karnataka HC: Minor Rape Victim's Birth Date in School Register Valid if Headmaster Testifies

Case Title: Manikanta @ Puli AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1247 OF 2018

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 283

The Karnataka High Court has held that entries made in school register indicating the birth date of a ward cannot be disbelieved and it is admissible evidence if the details are proved by examining the school headmaster as witness.

A division bench of Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar and Justice C M Joshi made the observation while partly allowing the appeal filed accused Manikanta @ Pulli who was sentenced to life imprisonment for the offence under sections 376(2)(i)(n), 506 of IPC and Section 5(j)(ii)(l) r/w Sec.6 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act.

Criminal Proceedings Should Be Restored Against Those Who Don't Adhere To Settlement In Cheque Dishonour Cases: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Mathikere Jayaram Shantharam AND Pramod C

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.2998 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 284

The Karnataka High Court has observed that criminal proceedings should be restored if an accused does not adhere to settlement arrived at between parties in a case registered under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, with an intention only to dodge the issue after settlement.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed a petition filed by one Mathikere Jayaram Shantharam questioning the order of the Magistrate court dated 17-01-2023, which issued a fine levy warrant and notice for attachment of personal properties of the accused.

Mitigating Factors Like Long Service, Promotions To Be Considered While Imposing Punishment On Delinquent Employee: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: M R Nagarajan AND The Syndicate Bank & Others

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 1337 OF 2015

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 285

The Karnataka High Court has said that punishment upon a delinquent employee should be commensurate with the gravity of guilt and while awarding punishment, factors like the long and spotless service rendered by the delinquent, the number and nature of promotions earned by him till initiation of disciplinary proceedings, the encomia awarded to him, the shortness of the period remaining for superannuation, etc. be considered.

Criminal Trial Is Voyage To Truth, Conviction Not The Objective: Karnataka HC Allows Murder Accused To Show Media Interviews At Trial To Confront Witness

Case Title: Aravinda Reddy AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.12056 OF 2022

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 286

The Karnataka High Court has set aside an order passed by the trial court rejecting an application filed by a murder accused seeking permission to confront PW-1 (Complainant) by playing video footage recorded by the media in the presence of the Police Officers of witnesses when the deceased was brought to the government hospital after the incident.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna while allowing the petition filed by Aravinda Reddy said “The order of the concerned Court holding that it would not be a previous statement and the DVD/DVR/video footage cannot be permitted to be played, is rendered unsustainable. If it leads to discovery of truth and the discovery of truth leads to innocence of the accused, it should be permitted to come on record.”

Karnataka High Court Temporarily Stays BEML's Group-C Recruitment Notification Over Contractual Workers Seeking Regularisation Of Employment

Case Title: WORKMEN OF BEML LTD & Others AND Union of India & ANR

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.573/2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 287

The Karnataka High Court has kept in abeyance a recruitment notification issued by the Bharat Earth Movers Limited (BEML) dated 27.09.2023 calling for recruitment to the Group-C position.

A single judge bench of Justice K S Hemalekha said “This Court feels it appropriate in the peculiar facts and circumstances to keep the impugned notification (dated 27-09-2023) in abeyance for a period of one month from today.”

Assessment Order Passed Against Dead Person Is Nullity: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Smt. Sowmya S. Versus ITO

Case No.: Writ Petition No. 25728 Of 2023 (T-IT)

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 288

The Karnataka High Court, while quashing the assessment order, held that the assessment order under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the Income Tax Act amounts to nullity.

The bench of Justice S. Sunil Dutt Yadav has observed that when the assessee dies during the pendency of the proceedings, proceedings are to be continued through the legal representatives of the deceased.

Reasonable Opportunity To Be Heard Before Cancelling FCRA Registration Not Restricted To Issuing Show-Cause Notice, Includes Personal Hearing: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Centre for Wildlife Studies AND Union of India & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.27301 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 289

The Karnataka High Court has set aside an order passed by the Union Ministry of Home Affairs cancelling the certificate of registration issued under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010, to a trust Centre for Wildlife Studies, on the grounds that no personal hearing was granted to the trust before passing the order.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by the trust whose Chief functionary is Ullas Karanth, grandson of novelist Dr. K Shivarama Karanth and set aside the order dated 04-09-2023.

It said “Principles of natural justice, is trite cannot be stretched to unlimited extent. But, it is equally trite that when consequences thereof are grave, it should be complied with in its entirety even stretching in a little further. Therefore, the words depicted in the Act 'reasonable opportunity of being heard' cannot be restricted to issuance of a show cause notice but a personal hearing in the peculiar facts of the case owing to the peculiarity of sub-section (3) of Section 14 of the Act must have been afforded to the petitioner.”

No Universal Formula For Using One Language In Govt Affairs: Karnataka HC Dismisses Plea Seeking Mandatory Usage Of Kannada In Govt Correspondence

Case Title: Gurunath Vadde AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: WP 4962/2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 290

The Karnataka High Court on Friday refused to entertain a public interest litigation seeking a direction on the government for government correspondence at all levels to be done in the Kannada language.

A division bench of Chief Justice NV Anjaria and Justice KV Aravinda said “While the Kannada language which is the local language in the state has to be promoted and to be given importance, that itself will not justify entertaining the present public interest litigation, by directing the government and its officials to use Kannada language.”