Karnataka High Court Weekly Roundup: February 26 - March 3, 2024

Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 93 To 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 107

Nominal Index:

K Lakshmi AND Canara Bank. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 93

Dr Rajesh Kumar D AND State of Karnataka & Others 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 94

ABC AND State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 95

Shivappa AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 96

Mazin Abdul Rahman @ Mazin. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 97

Sharath Chandrasekhar AND Union of India. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 98

Sikandar AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 99

Junaid B AND State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 100

Chinnammayya AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 101

A Alice AND Karnataka Transmission Corporation Limited. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 102

B A Umesh AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 103

B Mohammed Kunhi & ANR AND Abdul Saleem Hassan. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 104

Shariff Constructions AND Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 105

ABC AND XYZ. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 106

Dr Lata Krishnaraddi Mankali AND State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 107

Judgments/Orders

Compassionate Appointment | Looking Into Daughter's Marital Status To Determine Her Dependency On Deceased By Itself Not Discrimination: Karnataka HC

Case Title: K Lakshmi AND Canara Bank

Case No: Writ Petition No 27347 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 93

The Karnataka High Court has held that merely because the appointing authority looked into a daughter's marital status to determine her dependency on a deceased employee will not by itself amount to gender discrimination.

A single judge bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum clarified that the object of compassionate appointment is firmly rooted in addressing the immediate financial crisis faced by families following the demise of a family member.

Karnataka Examination Authority Allotted MD Respiratory Seat 'Illegally': High Court Imposes Rs.1 Lakh Cost

Case Title: Dr Rajesh Kumar D AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 7951 OF 2022

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 94

The Karnataka High Court has imposed a cost of Rs 1 lakh on Karnataka Examination Authority after holding that allotment of MD in Respiratory Medicine seat made in favour of a candidate was wholly illegal.

A division bench of Chief Justice P S Dinesh Kumar and Justice T G Shivashankare Gowda allowed the petition filed by Dr. Rajesh Kumar D and set aside the order allotting seat to Pradeep Naik G and directed the KEA to allot the MD in Respiratory Medicine seat in favour of the petitioner and issue necessary orders in that behalf within two weeks.

Citing Weak Socio-Economic Background Of Accused & Survivor, Karnataka High Court Quashes POCSO Case Over Consensual Relationship With Minor

Case Title: ABC AND State of Karnataka

Case No: Criminal Petition No 13469 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 95

The Karnataka High Court recently quashed the criminal prosecution initiated against a 20-year old youth for allegedly marrying a minor girl and committing sexual intercourse, leading to her giving birth to a child.

A single judge bench of Justice Hemant Chandangoudar allowed the petition filed by the youth who was charged under Sections 366(A), 376(1) of the IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.

Fast Track Courts & Alternate Dispute Resolution Not Sufficient To Reduce Burden, Courts Should Curb Abuse Of Legal Procedures: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Shivappa AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: Criminal Revision Petition No 100280 OF 2022.

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 96

The Karnataka High Court has observed that Courts should be very conscious and unless it is satisfied that the material evidence placed before it warrants exercise of power under Section 216 (Court may alter charge), the powers under Section 216 of Cr.P.C. should not be exercised.

A single judge bench of Justice S Vishwajith Shetty said “Abuse of legal procedure is one of the major factors for delay in disposal of cases. Unless the Courts dispense with such procedures which are totally unnecessary and causes no prejudice to the parties if they are dispensed with, it would not be possible for the Courts to take effective steps for speedy disposal of the cases.”

It added “Providing Fast Track Court and use of Alternate Dispute Resolution, is not sufficient to reduce the burden of the Courts. The courts have to be proactive and they are not only required to dispense with unnecessary procedures but are also required to ensure that legal procedures are not abused.”

UAPA | Article 21 Can't Be Stretched To Protect Those Posing A Threat To Nation's Sovereignty & Integrity: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Mazin Abdul Rahman

Case No: Criminal Appeal No 2248 of 2023.

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 97

The Karnataka High Court while dismissing an appeal by an accused charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, said “Article 21 cannot be stretched too long to afford protection to persons who have least concern for rule of law and pose threat to sovereignty and integrity of the nation.”

A division bench of Justices Sreenivas Harish Kumar and Vijaykumar A Patil dismissed the appeal filed by accused Mazin Abdul Rahman who is charged with sections 120B, 121, 121A of IPC and sections 18, 20 and 38 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, for being associated with banned terrorist outfit Islamic State (IS), challenging the order of the special court refusing bail to him.

Passport Authority Can't Refuse Renewal/ Re-Issue Citing Pending Criminal Investigation Where Cognizance Is Not Yet Taken: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Sharath Chandrasekhar AND Union of India

Case No: Writ Petition No 18066 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 98

The Karnataka High Court has held that Passport authorities cannot deny re-issuance/renewal of passport to those passport holders against whom pending criminal cases are at the stage of investigation, and the concerned court has not yet taken cognizance of the offence.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna directed the authorities to act in accordance with the clarification issued vide Office Memorandum dated 10.10.2019 issued by the Ministry of External Affairs wherein it is clarified that mere filing of FIRs and cases under investigation do not come under the purview of Section 6(2)(f) (of the Passport Act) and that criminal proceedings would only be considered pending against an applicant if a case has been registered before any Court of law and the court has taken cognizance of the same.

The bench said “it is expected of the Passport Authorities to act in accordance with the clarification as obtaining in the Office Memorandum dated 10.10.2019 and not drive every passport holder to knock at the doors of this Court, for redressal of their grievance.”

S.32(5) Of Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act For Formation Of New Layouts Not Applicable To Single Plot Development: High Court

Case Title: Sikandar AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 677 OF 2022

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 99

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that a private person is not required to forego portion of his land for the formation of the public road without receiving any compensation from the authorities.

A single judge bench of Justice M I Arun allowed the petition filed by Sikandar and said “Respondent 4 (The Commissioner, Tumakuru Urban Development Authority) and 5 (The Commission Tumakuru Mahanagara Palike) are directed to pass necessary award and compensate the petitioner or owner of the property, which is the subject matter of the writ petition, which is used/intended to be used for formation of the road.”

S.222 CrPC | Minor Offence Should Be Cognate Of Major Offence, Can't Be Entirely Different Constituted By Different Ingredients: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Junaid B AND State of Karnataka

Case No: Criminal Appeal No 1328 of 2012.

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 100

The Karnataka High Court has held that a minor offence within the meaning of Section 222 CrPC would not be something independent of the main offence or an offence merely involving lesser punishments. The minor offence should be composed of some of the ingredients constituting the main offence and be a part of it, Court said.

A single judge bench of Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar said, “In other words the minor offence should essentially be a cognate offence of the major offence and not entirely a distinct and different offence constituted by altogether different ingredients.”

Karnataka Co-Operative Societies Act | Right To Vote & Contest Available To Member Does Not Automatically Pass On To Legal Representative: High Court

Case Title: Chinnammayya AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 1805 OF 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 101

The Karnataka High Court has held that a nominee or a legal representative of a member of a Co–operative Society, who is admitted as a member after the death of a member, cannot vote and contest in the election to the Board of a Co-operative Society or a general meeting, if he has not completed one year after being admitted as a member.

A single judge bench of Justice Ananth Ramanath Hegde dismissed a petition filed by one Chinnammayya who made a claim to vote at the elections held by Begihalli Milk Producers Co-operative Societies Ltd and challenged the decision of the Society which included her in the ineligible voter's list.

Tubectomy & Vasectomy Serve The Same Purpose Of Preventing Further Childbirth: Karnataka HC Directs KPTCL To Encash Rtd Employee's Privilege Leave

Case Title: A Alice AND Karnataka Transmission Corporation Limited

Case No: Writ Petition No 33653 OF 2014

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 102

The Karnataka High Court has directed State's Power Transmission Corporation to encash 90 days unavailed privileged leave sanctioned for maternity care to a retired woman employee, which was forfeited from the terminal benefits on the grounds that the requirement of her husband undergoing vasectomy was not met with.

A Single judge bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum allowed the petition filed by A Alice and granted her liberty to make a fresh representation to the Superintendent Engineer, BESCOM and seek 90 days encashment of privilege leave which was forfeited.

Karnataka HC Refuses Parole To Serial Killer Umesh Reddy, Says Competing Public Interest Can't Be Ignored Especially In Case Of Life Convict

Case Title: B A Umesh AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: Writ Petition No 23950 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 103

The Karnataka High Court has said that in cases where the convicts are undergoing life imprisonment, competing public interest cannot be ignored while considering their application seeking parole.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed a petition filed by convict BA Umesh alias Umesh Reddy, a serial killer seeking 30 days parole to attend to his ailing mother and carry out repairs to her house.

The court said “It is not that in every case, one should be granted parole for the asking. Both sides of the coin will have to be considered, one, the necessity for grant of parole ingrained in the reformation theory of sentencing the other, competing public interest. Particularly in cases where the convicts are undergoing life imprisonment the other side of the coin cannot be ignored.”

Court Fee Payable In Landlord's Eviction Suit Can't Include Security Deposit Which Is To Be Refunded To Tenant Upon Vacating Premises: Karnataka HC

Case Title: B Mohammed Kunhi & ANR AND Abdul Saleem Hassan

Case No: Civil Revision Petition no 461 OF 2019

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 104

The Karnataka High Court has held that in a suit filed by a landlord for evicting a tenant, the landlord is required to pay a Court fee on the rent payable and not include the security deposit which is an advance paid by the tenant to the landlord.

A single judge bench of Justice M I Arun said “In a suit filed by the landlord for evicting the tenant, he is required to pay a Court fee on the rents payable and cannot take into consideration the security deposit, which are the advance amounts paid which he is required to refund to the tenant upon the tenant vacating the premises concerned.”

Karnataka High Court Issues Guidelines To Be Followed While Reopening Self-Assessment Of Property Tax

Case Title: Shariff Constructions AND Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike & ANR

Case No: Writ Petition No 1867 of 2024

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 105

The Karnataka High Court has issued guidelines to be followed by Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) while reopening self-assessment of property tax against property owners where returns are not filed and in cases of random scrutiny.

A single judge bench of Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav said “It is noticed that in most of the petitions filed by the property owners, the contention that is taken is that the demand notice raised as well as the show cause notice issued, are not preceded by the procedure stipulated under the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020 and accordingly, it is submitted that unless there is an inspection in their presence, the consequential notices and orders are required to be set aside.”

Further it said, “In light of numerous petitions filed questioning the correctness of the procedure followed by BBMP while reopening the self-assessment returns, need has arisen to lay down the procedure that is required to be followed in cases of reopening self-assessment where returns are not filed and in cases of random scrutiny.”

Mother Taking Care Of Children Does A "Whole Time Job", Can't Be Said To Be Lazying Around: Karnataka High Court Enhances Maintenance

Case Title: ABC AND XYZ

Case No: Writ Petition No 14094 OF 2023

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 106

The Karnataka High Court has observed that taking care of the children, for a mother, is a whole time job and the husband cannot deny maintenance amount on the ground that she being qualified is not willing to work and earn money and wants to live on the maintenance that the husband pays.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by a woman questioning the order of the trial court granting a monthly maintenance amount under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act to the tune of Rs 18,000 instead of Rs 36,000 sought by her.

S.19 POCSO Act Doesn't Obligate Doctor To "Investigate And Gather Knowledge" Of Sexual Assault To Report It To Police: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Dr Lata Krishnaraddi Mankali AND State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 100169 OF 2020

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 107

The Karnataka High Court has held that Sections 19 and 21 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act puts an obligation on a doctor to inform the relevant authorities when she/he has knowledge of an offence under the Act. There is no obligation on this person to investigate and gather knowledge about the offence.

A single judge bench of Justice Ramachandra D Huddar said “The expression used is "knowledge" which means that some information received by such a person gives him/her knowledge about the commission of the crime. There is no obligation on this person to investigate and gather knowledge.”