Karnataka High Court Weekly Roundup: July 15 - July 21, 2024

Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 316 To 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 325

Nominal Index:

Union of India & ANR AND B Arulappa. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 316

Vinod Kumar K AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 317

Nandini AND The DG & IGP of Police, Bengaluru & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 318

Thanmay U AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 319

Inayathulla N AND State By Police Sub Inspector. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 320

XXX AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 321

Manjunatha M S AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 322

S Muniraju And State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 323

Bylamurthy AND M.G Gangalakshmamma & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 324

Informatica Business Solutions Private Limited Versus Acit. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 325

Judgments/Orders

CAT Order To Consider Employee's Plea For Voluntary Retirement Is Binding, Authority Cannot Direct Compulsory Retirement Instead: Karnataka HC

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 316

Case Title: Union of India & ANR AND B Arulappa

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.25744 OF 2023

The Karnataka High Court has said that directions passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) to consider the representation for voluntary retirement made by an employee are binding and authorities cannot instead direct compulsory retirement without considering the plea for voluntary retirement.

A division bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde, said thus while dismissing a petition filed by Union of India challenging an order passed by the Tribunal setting aside the compulsory retirement order passed against B Arulappa, Commissioner of Income Tax and directing the authority to consider his application for voluntary retirement.

Right To Relief Lost: Karnataka High Court Dismisses Plea Filed After 44 Yrs Challenging Land Acquisition Proceedings From 1978

Case Title: Vinod Kumar K AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 325 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 317

Observing that “Forty four years is too long a time to maintain legal action. With passage of such protracted time, the right to relief is lost,” the Karnataka High Court dismissed an appeal filed by an appellant questioning the land acquisition proceedings initiated and completed in the year 1978.

A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind dismissed the appeal filed by Vinod Kumar K. The appellant had challenged a single judge bench order dismissing his petition praying to call for records pertaining to the proceedings initiated by the Special Land Acquisition officer. Further, direct the authorities to initiate proceedings and pass an award under Section 11 of the Right to Fair, Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

Preventive Detention Aims To Ensure Peace In Society: Karnataka High Court Denies Relief To Man Involved In 45 Cases

Case Title: Nandini AND The DG & IGP of Police, Bengaluru & Others

Case No: WPHC NO.55 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 318

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by the wife of a detenu questioning his detention under the Karnataka Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Gamblers, Goondas (Immoral Traffic Offencers, Slum-Grabbers and Video or Audio Pirates) Act, 1985.

A division bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice Ramachandra D Huddar noted that the man is involved in 45 criminal cases registered at different police stations. It said, “The criminal antecedents of detenue galore on record and they lend credence to the contention of learned SPP that his detention is inevitably ordered after exploring all alternatives.”

State Govt's Decision To Expunge 50 Out-Of-Syllabus Questions From KCET-2024 Cannot Be Interfered With By Court: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Thanmay U AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 16700 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 319

The Karnataka High Court has refused to look into the validity of the State government's decision to set up a committee to examine 'out of syllabus' questions asked in the Karnataka CET 2024 exams held in April and its finding to exclude around 50 questions which were out of syllabus.

A single judge bench of Justice S Suni Dutt Yadav while disposing of a petition filed by 18-year-old, Thanmay U who argued the case in person said, “The Court cannot enter into the aspect of validity of decision taken by the Government based on the applicable syllabus which is the decision of the experts.”

Watching Child Pornography Online Will Not Attract Offence U/S 67B Of IT Act: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Inayathulla N AND State By Police Sub Inspector

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 13141 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 320

The Karnataka High Court has held that a person watching child pornography material online cannot be charged for an offence under Section 67B of the Information Technology Act.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna quashed proceedings initiated against one Inayathulla N and said, “The allegation against the petitioner is that he has watched a pornographic website. This, in the considered view of the Court, would not become publishing or transmitting of material, as is necessary under Section 67B of the IT Act.”

Karnataka HC Recalls Order Which Held Watching Child Porn Online Not An Offence, Says Erroneously Overlooked Relevant Provision Of IT Act

Case Title: Inayathulla N AND State By Police Sub Inspector

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 13141 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 320

The Karnataka High Court on Friday recalled its order passed on July 10, wherein it had held that a person watching child pornography online cannot be charged for an offence under Section 67B of the Information Technology Act.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said “This court had passed the order without noticing section 67B (b), it is an error.”

The court had quashed the proceedings initiated against one Inayathulla N stating that watching pornographic website would not amount to "publishing or transmitting of material", as is necessary under Section 67B of the IT Act.

Merely Because Love Wanes Away With Time, Consensual Acts Between Two Adults Cannot Be Called Rape: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: XXX AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.7704 OF 2022

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 321

The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that consensual acts between two adults who were in love over a long period of six years will not attract the offence of rape.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by a man and quashed the case registered for offences punishable under sections 376 and 417 of the Indian Penal Code.

[Trademarks Act] Infringement Proceedings Can't Be Quashed Due To 'Irregularity' Of Search & Seizure Without Registrar's Opinion: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Manjunatha M S AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1620 OF 2017

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 322

The Karnataka High Court has held that non-compliance with Subsection (4) of Section 115 of the Trade Mark Act, which mandates taking opinion of the Registrar of Trade Marks, before carrying out search and seizure is an irregularity for which the infringement proceedings cannot be quashed.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj held thus while dismissing a petition filed by Manjunatha M S who had approached the court questioning the prosecution initiated against him for offences punishable under Sections 482, 483 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 102, 103 and 104 of the Trade Mark Act, 1999.

MLA's PIL To Release Funds For Constituency Not Maintainable, Can Raise Issue In Assembly Or Before Govt: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: S Muniraju And State of Karnataka

Case No: WP 16180/2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 323

The Karnataka High Court on Friday dismissed a public interest litigation filed by Dasarahalli Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) S Muniraju, belonging to Bharatiya Janata Party, seeking a direction to the state government to release an amount of Rs 78 crore for carrying out the developmental work in his constituency.

A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind said “Petitioner herein is an elected representative, he is an MLA, it is always open for petitioner to flag such issues before the house or before the Government and its competent authorities. Filing a writ petition in the nature of a PIL and seeking relief on such scores would not be said to be justified, no such PIL can be entertained.”

Continuous Readiness And Willingness On Part Of Purchaser Is Condition Precedent For Granting Relief Of Specific Performance: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Bylamurthy AND M.G Gangalakshmamma & Others

Case No: REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1457 OF 2022

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 324

The Karnataka High Court has said that continuous readiness and willingness on the part of the plaintiff (purchaser) is a condition precedent to grant the relief of specific performance by the court.

A single judge bench of Justice H P Sandesh held thus while dismissing the appeal filed by one Bylamurthy challenging an order of the trial court and the first appellate court rejecting his prayer for specific relief.

Reassessment Notice To Non-Existing Entity Is Not Legally Tenable: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Informatica Business Solutions Private Limited Versus Acit

Case No.: Writ Petition No. 17300 OF 2024 (T-IT)

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 325

The Karnataka High Court has held that the reassessment notice to a non-existing entity is not legally tenable.

The bench of Justice S. Sunil Dutt Yadav has observed that the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act was issued on February 28, 2024, with respect to the assessment year 2020–21. The scheme of amalgamation has fixed the appointed date as April 1, 2019, and the entity to which notice is issued is deemed not to be in existence.