Karnataka High Court Monthly Digest - May 2023 [Citations: 165 To 197]

Nominal Index

Central Public Information Officer/Deputy Director General, Doordarshan Kendra And Central Information Commission & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 165

D K Shivakumar And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 166

D B Jatti And M/s Jamnadas Devidas. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 167

Ravi M And Union of India & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 168

B Prashanth Hegde And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 169

ABC And XYZ. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 170

Karnataka Golf Association And Karnataka Information Commission & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 171

N P Amruthesh And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 172

Dilshad And Athaulla Khan & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 173

Emmanuel Michael And Union of India. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 174

Gameskraft Technologies Private Limited Versus Directorate General Of Goods. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 175

Vinod Damji Patel And The Hoskote Yojana Pradhikara & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 176

Gajaraja And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 177

Social Democratic Party of India And Union of India & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 178

ABC And XYZ. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 179

Sri Jagadguru Murugharajendra Vidhya Peetha & ANR And The Chief Secretary & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 180

Siddappa B H And The State By Lokayukta Police. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 181

ABC And XYZ. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 182

Karnataka General Labour Union And Government of India & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 183

Gangamma & ANR And Pratibha & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 184

C Manjunath And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 185

Sharnavva @Kasturi and Shivappa. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 186

Raman Sundaresan And Joint Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 187

Blink Commerce Private Limited And Blinkhit Private Limited. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 188

Town Essentials Pvt. Ltd. v. Daily Ninja Delivery Services Pvt. Ltd. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 189

NG & others And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 190

Reeth Abraham And Sunil Abraham. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 191

G Jagadish Kumar And K G Murali. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 192

Prasad A A And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 193

Gurushree High-Tech Multi Speciality Hospital And Commissioner For Health And Family Welfare And Chairman Appellate Authority & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 194

N P Amrutesh And Union of India & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 195

Karnataka State Level Advocates Clerks Association And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 196

Rangaraju @ Vajapeyi And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 197

Judgments/Orders

RTI Act | Public Information Officer Cannot Challenge Appellate Authority's Order Directing It To Disclose Information: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Central Public Information Officer/Deputy Director General, Doordarshan Kendra And Central Information Commission & ANR.

Case NO: WRIT PETITION NO. 2346 OF 2011 (GM-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 663 OF 2011

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 165

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that under the Right to Information Act, a Public information Officer has no authority to prefer an appeal against an order passed by the Appellate Authority, directing him to furnish information to an applicant under the Act. The power to prefer an appeal challenging an order passed by the Appellate authority has been conferred only on the persons who had sought for information, it held.

A single judge bench of Justice N S Sanjay Gowda has said, “There is no provision under the Act which enables any of the parties, let alone a Public Information Officer, to prefer an appeal against the order to the Second Appellate Authority.”

[DK Shivakumar Disproportionate Assets Case] State's Consent For CBI Probe Merely Executive Order, Not Sanction For Prosecution: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: D K Shivakumar And State of Karnataka

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.10479 OF 2020

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 166

The Karnataka High Court last month dismissed a petition filed by Congress leader D K Shivakumar seeking to quash the sanction for prosecution granted by State to the CBI, to investigate the offences alleged against him under the provision of Prevention of Corruption Act.

A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan said the impugned order was merely a consent given by the State under Section 6 of the DSPE Act, "it is not a sanction as required under either Sections 19 or 17 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.”

Section 87 NI Act | Cheque Not Invalid If Altered With Consent Of Drawer: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: D B Jatti And M/s Jamnadas Devidas

Case No: CRL.R.P No. 964 OF 2019

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 167

The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that if the payee or holder of the cheque had made alteration with the consent of drawer on cheque, such alteration cannot be a ground to resist right of payee or holder thereof.

A single judge bench of Justice Rajendra Badamikar dismissed a revision petition filed by accused D B Jatti who had challenged the conviction order passed by the trial court for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, and upheld by the Appellate court.

Karnataka Elections 2023: High Court Dismisses PIL Seeking Permission For NRIs To Caste Vote From Abroad

Case Title: Ravi M And Union of India & others

Case No: WP 9720/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 168

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday rejected a PIL filed by a Non Resident Indian (NRI) seeking grant of voting rights to NRIs from the countries they reside in, during the Karnataka Assembly Elections, scheduled to be held on May 10.

A vacation bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice Vijaykumar A Patil rejected the petition filed by Ravi M. In doing so, it accepted the submission made by the Election Commission of India that “The Right to vote is not a fundamental right and it is a creature of law. Therefore unless law is shown which provides for voting, the Right to vote cannot be sought for.”

Section 173 CrPC | Instruct All Investigating Agencies To Communicate Final Report To Complainant: Karnataka High Court To DGP, IG

Case Title: B Prashanth Hegde And State of Karnataka

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.18864 OF 2021

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 169

The Karnataka High Court recently directed the Inspector General and Director General of Police (DG and IGP), to instruct all Investigating Officers of the Investigation Agencies to communicate the final report prepared by them to the first informant, as per Section 173(2)(ii) of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).

Section 173(2)(ii) obligates investigating officer to communicate, in such manner as may be prescribed by the State Government, the action taken by him, to the person, if any, by whom the information relating to the commission of the offence was first given.

Karnataka High Court Refuses To Take Away Father's Visitation Rights On Ground That He Remarried After Divorce & Bears Another Child

Case Title: ABC And XYZ

Case No: M.F.A. NO.8527 OF 2015

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 170

The Karnataka High Court has refused to interfere with the order of a family court granting visitation rights of a minor daughter to her father. The mother of the child had objected to it on the grounds that her ex-husband had remarried twice after being divorced from her.

A division bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Vijaykumar A Patil observed, “The assertion of the appellant is that the respondent has married twice after getting divorce from the appellant and his second wife has a child out of her earlier wedlock and son is in custody of the respondent, the grant of any visitation rights would affect the health, well being of the minor daughter. The apprehension of the appellant has been taken care of by the Family Court, keeping in mind that the minor child being the female child of the appellant and respondent, the permanent custody is given to the appellant-mother.”

Karnataka Golf Association Substantially Financed By Govt In Form Of Subsidised Rent, Qualifies As Public Authority Under RTI Act: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Karnataka Golf Association And Karnataka Information Commission & ANR

Case NO: WRIT PETITION NO. 55173 OF 2014

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 171

The Karnataka High Court has declared that the Karnataka Golf Association is a public authority as contemplated under the Right to Information Act (RTI). A single judge bench of Justice N S Sanjay Gowda dismissed a petition filed by the Association challenging the order of Karnataka Information Commission by which it declared the Association as a public authority under Section 2(h) of the Act.

Karnataka High Court Refuses To Stay PM Narendra Modi's Road Shows In Bengaluru

Case Title: N P Amruthesh And State of Karnataka & Others.

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 9952 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 172

The Karnataka High Court on Friday refused to stay the roadshows to be held by Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Bengaluru this Saturday and Sunday, ahead of assembly elections in the State on May 10. A vacation bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit and Vijaykumar A Patil held a special hearing today in the PIL filed by Advocate Amruthesh N P, raising concern over road blocks and traffic jams due to the rally.

Once Criminal Court Finds A Person Guilty Of Rash & Negligent Driving, Motor Accident Tribunal Can't Hold Driver Was Someone Else: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Dilshad And Athaulla Khan & others

Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5640 OF 2018 (MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 333 OF 2018 (MV-D), MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 334 OF 2018 (MV-I)

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 173

The Karnataka High Court recently said that once a competent criminal court has found the driver of an offending vehicle guilty and convicted him for charges of rash and negligent driving and causing death, findings of Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal that the driver of the car was another person, cannot be accepted.

A single judge bench of Justice N S Sanjay Gowda set aside the finding of the tribunal that had held the insurance company was not liable to pay as Athaulla Khan (driver) was not involved in the accident because in the MLC register and the wound certificate, the name of the driver was shown as Akthar, son of Ameer Jan Khan who had caused accident.

High Pendency Of Cases In NDPS Court, Humanly Impossible To Dispose Them In Time Bound Manner: Karnataka HC While Refusing Bail To Kenyan Citizen

Case Title: Emmanuel Michael And Union of India.

Case NO: CRIMINAL PETITION No.1469/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 174

The Karnataka High Court recently reflected upon the huge pendency of cases before a Special NDPS Court, while refusing bail to a Kenyan citizen who was held under the Act over two years ago for allegedly attempting to smuggle drugs in the country via foreign routes.

A single judge bench of Justice M G Uma noted that pendency before the Trial Court as on April 1, 2023 is 1,308 special cases and remarked, “It is humanly impossible to dispose of all those matters in a time bound manner since invariably in all these cases there will be lengthy evidence that is being led by the prosecution and equally lengthy cross examination on behalf of each of the accused. There will again be lengthy arguments even on bail applications and on merits. Under such circumstances, the practicability of disposing of the matter expeditiously within a few months would be a herculean task.”

Online Rummy Games Played Are Not Taxable As ‘Betting’ And ‘Gambling: Karnataka High Court Quashes GST Intimation Notice Demanding Rs. 21,000 Crores Against Gameskraft

Case Title: Gameskraft Technologies Private Limited Versus Directorate General Of Goods

Case No.: Writ Petition No. 19570 Of 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 175

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the GST Intimation Notice to the tune of Rs 21,000 crore and held that online/electronic/digital Rummy games and other Online/Electronic/Digital games played on Gameskraft’s platforms are not taxable as "betting" and "gambling".

The bench of Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar has observed that online, electronic, and digital games, which are also substantially and preponderantly games of skill and not of chance, are also not gambling.

Planning Authority Forcing Private Landowner To Surrender Property For Proposed Acquisition Free Of Cost Amounts To Extortion: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Vinod Damji Patel And The Hoskote Yojana Pradhikara & ANR

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.15103 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 176

The Karnataka High Court has quashed an endorsement issued by the Planning Authority of Hoskote Taluk in rural Bangalore, directing a private landowner to surrender a portion of his land free of cost, claiming it has been earmarked for widening of National Highway, and only then it would approve the construction plan submitted on the remaining land.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj allowed the petition filed by one Vinod Damji Patel and directed the authority to consider and approve the plan submitted by the petitioner without insisting for such surrender free of cost. It remarked,

Karnataka High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against Prison Officials For Alleged VIP Treatment Of AIADMK's Ex-General Secretary VK Sasikala

Case Title: Gajaraja And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.16978 OF 2022 c/w WRIT PETITION NO.1142 OF 2022, WRIT PETITION NO.3171 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 177

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against three officials of the Bengaluru Central Jail, charged with allegedly acting as broker in facilitating luxury amenities inside prison to former AIADMK General Secretary Sasikala Natarajan (VK Sasikala). Sasikala was lodged in prison in the year 2017 on being convicted by Supreme Court in a disproportionate assets case.

A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan allowed the petitions filed by Police Inspector Gajaraja; then Assistant Superintendent of Prisons Dr. Anitha R; and Chief Superintendent of Prisons Krishna Kumar.

Karnataka High Court Rejects Plea By Social Democratic Party Of India Against Sealing Of Its Mangalore Offices Under UAPA

Case Title: Social Democratic Party of India And Union of India & Others.

Case No: WRIT PETITION No. 23167 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 178

The Karnataka High Court has rejected a petition filed by Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI) seeking to unseal its properties in Mangalore which came to be sealed by the State government following the ban imposed by the Central Government on the organisation Popular Front of India (PFI).

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna observed that the notifications to seal the premises were issued under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. "Therefore, the petitioner has an alternative remedy which is statutory and necessarily to be availed of, in the peculiar facts of this case, as recording of evidence for the acts of the State is imperative.”

Father Engaging A Stranger In House To Videograph Him With Child Not Congenial Environment: Karnataka High Court Refuses Custody

Case Title: ABC And XYZ

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.23969 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 179

The Karnataka High Court recently declined interference with a family court order refusing custody of the minor daughter to her father as he failed to create a congenial atmosphere in his house for the child to stay.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna rejected the petition filed by the father and said, “It is a fact that there is nobody to take care of the child when the father is not around and the child is handed over to a male stranger. The mother has narrated that on several occasions the child had expressed her anguish getting too anxious about a stranger continuously photographing and videographing the child. If these facts are noticed, it becomes unmistakably clear that the father has not created a congenial atmosphere to the girl child, who is now 9 years old, he cannot therefore be heard to contend that he has a right to claim custody of the child, despite the afore-noted glaring facts.”

State Should Leave Religious Institutions To Solve Their Problems On Their Own: Karnataka High Court Removes Administrator For Mutt

Case Title: Sri Jagadguru Murugharajendra Vidhya Peetha & ANR And The Chief Secretary & others.

Case No: WP No. 25316/2022 c/w WP No.25318/2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 180

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a Government Order which appointed an Administrator to run the affairs of Sri Jagadguru Murugharajendra Bruhan Mutt at Chitradurga. The administrator was appointed as the pontiff- Shivamurthy Murugha Sharanaru was arrested in September 2022 following cases registered against him under the POCSO Act.

A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit observed that interference of the State in Religious Institutions, goes against its professed secular credentials. "In secularism, State neutrality qua religion is inherent and this requires the governance to maintain a distance from the affairs of religious institutions of all faiths, equally and further to respect their autonomy...The State and its functionaries should realise that by their very nature they can not be a can not, be panacea to all the evils in society. As of necessity, it should leave religious institutions to solve their problems on their own by appropriate measures, such as community mediation/conciliation or judicial process, of course subject to all just exceptions,” it said.

S.91 CrPC | Correspondence Between IO And His Senior Not Part Of Chargesheet, Cannot Be Summoned: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Siddappa B H And The State By Lokayukta Police

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2954 OF 2023 CONNECTED WITH CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2906 OF 2023, CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2908 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 181

The Karnataka High Court has said that reports prepared by an investigating officer in discussion with his higher officers, before filing chargesheet, cannot be produced before the court for the purpose of evidence.

A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan said “Except the documents produced by the investigation officer under Section 161 of CrPC, the remaining documents cannot be summoned except for contradiction under Section 145 of Evidence Act.”

Parent Losing Child's Custody Should Be Given Sufficient Visitation Rights To Ensure Social, Psychological Contact With Child: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: ABC And XYZ

Case No: W.P.H.C. NO.34 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 182

The Karnataka High Court has directed a woman to comply with the settlement arrived at with her husband in regard to guardianship, custody and visitation rights of their minor son.

A division bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde disposed of a habeas corpus petition filed by the father to produce the minor son and directed the mother to handover the custody of the son to the petitioner during the summer vacation, as per their settlement.

Settlement Arrived At Though Interim In Conciliation Proceedings Between Workmen And Employer Is Binding On Both Parties: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Karnataka General Labour Union And Government of India & others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 9465 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 183

The Karnataka High Court has once again referred for Conciliation the matter regarding re-employment of 80 contract workers of Indian Telephones Limited who have been refused employment since December 2021, though they had been employed in the services for a period of 3 to 38 years.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj noted that without prejudice to issue of regularization, the management had undertaken in the conciliation proceedings to immediately take back some workers and rest as early as possible. It noted that though this settlement was only interim in nature, its non-compliance halted further progress in the conciliation proceedings.

No Scope For Determining Shares Of Parties While Deciding Application For Grant Of Succession Certificate: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Gangamma & ANR And Pratibha & ANR

Case No: CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.200010/2019

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 184

The Karnataka High Court has said that a court considering application for grant of Succession Certificate has no power to go into the substantial and intricate question of facts and law.

A single judge bench of Justice C M Joshi sitting at Kalaburagi bench, dismissed a petition filed by parents of one deceased Nagappa, challenging order of the trial court and appellate court granting succession certificate to the wife and son of the deceased. The court permitted the parents to approach the appropriate Court of law for determination of their grievance and for their share in the death benefits of the deceased.

'Parents Would Think Twice About Sending Their Girl Child To School': Karnataka High Court Refuses Bail To Teacher Accused Of Sexual Harassment

Case Title: C Manjunath And State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3560 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 185

The Karnataka High Court recently refused bail to a Government primary school teacher charged for allegedly sexually harassing the minor girl students studying in IV to VI standard.

A single judge bench of Justice Umesh M Adiga while rejecting the petition filed by C Manjunath observed, “Guru or teacher are considered as God in this Country and respected like a God. However, because of the alleged behaviour of the petitioner, even the parents think twice about sending their girl child to the school. It may spoil the name, fame and future of the said girl students. It is not a crime against the individual but crime against a society.”

Courts Hearing Maintenance Applications Under Domestic Violence Act Or S.125 CrPC Need Not Go Into Validity Of Marriage: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Sharnavva @Kasturi and Shivappa

Case No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.200044 OF 2018

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 186

The Karnataka High Court has held that courts while dealing with maintenance applications under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act or Section 125 of Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C), should not go into the validity of marriage.

A single judge bench of Justice S Rachaiah sitting at Kalaburagi bench confirmed the trial Court's order directing petitioner's husband to pay Rs 3,000, per month as maintenance.

[S.10 Emigration Act] Non-Payment Of Salary By Employer Can't Be Given Colour Of Running Illegal Recruiting Agency : Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Raman Sundaresan And Joint Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No. 16821 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 187

The Karnataka High Court has said an employee recruited by a company outside India, if not paid salaries, cannot raise a belated complaint against its Director of running a recruiting agency without a valid certificate under Section 10 of the Emigration Act.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed the petition filed by one Raman Sundaresan, questioning the internal communication between Joint Secretary to the Protector General of Emigrants and Director General of Police, stating that the complaint made by him is beyond the purview of Section 10 of the Act

Blinkhit v. Blinkit: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Interim Injunction Order Against Blinkit Citing Non-Use Of Registered Trademark By Blinkhit

Case Title: Blink Commerce Private Limited And Blinkhit Private Limited

Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5756 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 188

The Karnataka High Court last month set aside an interim injunction order of the trial court, temporary restraining the use of 'Blinkit' trademark- a famous online groceries delivery platform- for alleged violation of the rights of a software services firm Blinkhit.

Blinkhit claimed to have registered the marks ‘BLINKHIT’ and ‘iBLINKHIT’ since 2016.

A single judge bench of Justice S R Krishna Kumar observed that the main ground on which the trial court has granted temporary injunction is that Blinkhit had obtained the registered trademark much prior to the appellant starting the use of word BLINKIT for its business. However, the profit and loss account statement and balance sheet of Blinkhit would clearly indicate that no business was being carried on and no income was generated by the respondent by using the trademarks.

Non-Signatory Defendants Cannot Be Exposed To Arbitration Under Section 8 Of The A&C Act: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Town Essentials Pvt. Ltd. v. Daily Ninja Delivery Services Pvt. Ltd.

Case No: WP No. 15830 of 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 189

The Karnataka High Court has held that the non-signatory defendants cannot be exposed to arbitration under Section 8 of the A&C Act by allowing the dispute to be referred to arbitration.

The bench of Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar held that when the cause of action against all the defendants is stated to be the same, it cannot be bifurcated so to allow arbitration proceedings against few of the defendants and continuation of the suit against the others as it would lead to multiplicity of proceedings and delay in adjudication. It would also increase the cost of litigation and harassment to the parties and on occasions there is possibility of conflicting judgments and orders by two different forums.

Criminal Case Filed By Wife Accusing Husband, In-Laws Of Cruelty Loses Its Significance If Lodged After His Divorce Notice: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: NG & others And State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRL.P.NO.201257/2019 C/W CRL.P.NO.200660/2019

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 190

The Karnataka High Court recently quashed a First Information Report (FIR) registered by a woman alleging cruelty and dowry harassment, against her in-laws and other relatives of the husband.

A single judge bench of Justice S Rachaiah, sitting at Kalaburagi bench, allowed the petition seeking quashing of the case and said: “The criminal case filed by the wife, alleging cruelty, dowry harassment against the husband and in-laws loses its significance, in case the complaint is made, after receiving the divorce notice from her husband.”

Discretion Of Court To Transfer Or Club Cases Is Not Discretion Of A Mughal Emperor: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Reeth Abraham And Sunil Abraham

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 24842 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 191

The Karnataka High Court has set aside an order passed by the trial court dismissing an application filed by a woman to club two pending suits for a common trial and disposal. The suits filed by her and her ex-husband relate to the same property.

Justice Krishna S Dixit allowed the woman's petition and requested the trial judge to allow the subject application of the petitioner for clubbing and try both the suits together.

Attornment By Lessee Not Necessary For Transfer Of Property Leased Out To Him: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: G Jagadish Kumar And K G Murali

Case No: REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 650 OF 2011

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 192

The Karnataka High Court has said that attornment by lessee is not necessary for transfer of property leased out to him.

A single judge bench of Justice Ashok S Kinagi allowed the appeal filed by G Jagadish Kumar and directed the tenant K G Murali to vacate and handover the possession of suit property to the plaintiff. It rejected the contention of the defendant that the plaintiff is not the owner of suit schedule property and defendant is not the tenant under the plaintiff, as such, there is no relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant as the landlord/lessor and the tenant/lessee.

Karnataka High Court Quashes POCSO Case Against Man Who Dropped Minor Victim At Her Home On Instructions Of Main Accused

Case Title: Prasad A A And State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1294 OF 2020

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 193

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings launched under the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) against a man who dropped the minor victim at her home on the instructions of main accused.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna noted that Petitioner-accused was neither involved in the planning nor commission of the offence. "The allegation is against accused Nos 1 to 4 who have allegedly been a part of the commission of offence. The petitioner was not even present during the commission of offence or in the scene of alleged crime. The petitioner comes into the picture after everything is over and only for the purpose of driving the victim back to her grand-mother’s house. No other allegation is made against the petitioner," it observed.

Appellate Authority Can't Cure Jurisdictional Defect Of Original Authority: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Gurushree High-Tech Multi Speciality Hospital And Commissioner For Health And Family Welfare And Chairman Appellate Authority & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 729 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 194

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that if the original jurisdiction is not exercised by a competent authority, the Appellate authority even though competent cannot cure the jurisdictional defect of the original authority.

“If the original Authority is corum non-judice, the competent Appellate Authority, by considering the appeal cannot breathe life into such original order and make it corum judice,” a single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna has observed.

Breaking | Lawyer's Plea Against Permanent Benches Of Karnataka High Court At Dharwad & Kalaburagi Dismissed

Case Title: N P Amrutesh And Union of India & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.21879/2014

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 195

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday dismissed a public interest litigation seeking to strike down as unconstitutional the orders establishing permanent benches of the High Court at Dharwad and Kalaburagi (earlier Gulbarga).

A division bench of Justice B Veerappa and Justice K S Hemalekha observed that the benches had in fact rendered "distributive justice" to all the regions and thus, the petition serves absolutely no public interest.

Karnataka High Court Directs State To Formulate Welfare Scheme For Members Of Advocates' Clerks Association, Says They Serve The Judicial System

Case Title: Karnataka State Level Advocates Clerks Association And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No. 24053 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 196

The Karnataka High Court recently directed the State government to formulate a scheme for welfare of the members of State Level Advocates’ Clerks Association, within six months.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna observed, “The service rendered by the Advocates’ clerks is not a service to an individual, but to the system, being attached to the Advocates. Therefore, the Advocates’ Clerks play a significant role in the justice delivery system and if they are playing a significant role in the justice delivery system, the system cannot leave them in the lurch, in any eventuality that may ensue in the life of those registered Advocates’ Clerks.”

Rape On Woman's Dead Body Will Not Attract Section 376 IPC: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Rangaraju @ Vajapeyi And State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1610/2017

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 197

The Karnataka High Court has held that sexual assault on the dead body of woman will not attract the offence of Rape punishable under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code. It thus acquitted a man of rape charges for committing sexual assault on the dead body of a 21 years old girl, after murdering her.

A division bench of Justice B Veerappa and Justice Venkatesh Naik T partly allowed the appeal filed by convict Rangaraju @ Vajapeyi, thereby setting aside the conviction under Section 376 of the Code. However, the court upheld his conviction for murder and confirmed the life imprisonment sentence imposed by the trial court.