Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: October 2 To October 8, 2023

Nominal Index:

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.

Judgments/Orders

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 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.”