Karnataka High Court Weekly Roundup: March 10 To March 16, 2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 94 to 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 104

Nominal Index:

Vinod Kumar M N AND Union of India & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 94

Devendra Bhatia AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 95

B C Prasad & ANR AND The District Registrar And Deputy Commissioner of Stamps & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 96

Ismail Jabiulla & ANR AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 97

Prabhu Haveri AND The Commissioner For Social Welfare And Appellate Authority & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 98

Arthi B AND Karnataka State Law University & OThers. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 99

Munirathna AND State Of Karnataka. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 100

H Sanna Devanna & ANR AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 101

Moulali Challal AND State of Karnataka. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 102

M.A.DHAVALESHWAR AND THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 103

Ramesh Karoshi AND State of Karnataka. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 104

Judgments/Orders

'Covid-19 Has Subsided And Vaccines Have Become Unnecessary Today': Karnataka High Court Disposes Man's Plea For Second Dose

Case Title: Vinod Kumar M N AND Union of India & Others

Case No: WP 257/2022

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 94

The Karnataka High Court on Monday (March 10) disposed of a 2022 petition filed by one Vinod Kumar M N seeking a direction to the authorities to give him a second dose of Covid vaccine.

A single judge, Justice M Nagaprasanna said “The petitioner is before this court seeking a direction for a second dose of covid vaccine, the covid-19 has subsided and vaccines have become unnecessary today. Therefore the petition is disposed of as having become unnecessary.”

Karnataka High Court Declines To Quash Murder Case Filed By Son Against Father Over Death Of Mother Who Fell From 16th Floor Apartment

Case Title: Devendra Bhatia AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.19567 OF 2023

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 95

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash murder proceedings initiated by a man against his father after his mother died by falling from their apartment situated on the 16th floor.

Justice M Nagaprasanna while dismissing the petition filed by Devendra Bhatia said “When the evidence of both the children as quoted hereinabove would pin the petitioner down albeit, prima facie, it is ununderstandable as to how this Court would exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. on an offence under Section 302 of the IPC against the accused and obliterate the trial. If the children have complained against the petitioner narrating vivid details, it becomes a matter for a full-blown trial, where the petitioner has to come out clean.”

Recovery Of Stamp Duty Not Levied Or Short Levied Can Be Done Only Within Five Years After Registration Of Documents: Karnataka HC

Case Title: B C Prasad & ANR AND The District Registrar And Deputy Commissioner of Stamps & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 41844 OF 2017

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 96

The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that proceedings by way of show cause notice under Section 46A of the Karnataka Stamps Act for recovery of stamp duty not levied or short levied cannot be initiated five years after the registration of the document, being the date on which the stamp duty fell due.

Justice Suraj Govindaraj said this while allowing a petition filed by B C Prasad challenging an order passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (KAT), which upheld the order of the Registrar dated 30-10-2010, directing the petitioner to remit a shortfall in the stamp duty of Rs.98,500 on the documents registered in the year 1995.

Probe By Police Before Lodging FIR Is Illegal: Karnataka HC Quashes Case Against Two Accused Of Illegally Transporting Cattle For Slaughter

Case Title: Ismail Jabiulla & ANR AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 566 OF 2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 97

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a case registered against two persons accused of illegally transporting cattle for slaughter, who were charged on the basis of a confessional statement given by the co-accused.

Justice Hemant Chandangoudar allowed the petition filed by Ismail Jabiulla and another and quashed the case registered against them under Sections 4, 6, 7, 8, and 12(2) of the Karnataka Prevention of Slaughter and Preservation of Cattle Ordinance, 2020, read with provisions of the Transportation of Animals Act and Sections 181(3) and 177 of the Indian Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, along with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

Caste Certificate Issued After Verification Can't Be Invalidated Merely Because Sibling Seeks Scholarship Under Different Caste: Karnataka HC

Case Title: Prabhu Haveri AND The Commissioner For Social Welfare And Appellate Authority & Others.

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.104264 OF 2021

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 98

The Karnataka High Court has observed that the action of a sibling in securing a scholarship under the Backward Class Category cannot invalidate the caste certificate issued to another sibling under a different caste.

Allowing the petition of one Prabhu Haveri who belonged to Hindu Bhovi caste, Justice M Nagaprasanna remarked that the 'greed' of the petitioner's brother to claim a scholarship under the Backward Class cannot invalidate the petitioner's caste certificate which was validated by the concerned authorities.

Karnataka High Court Rejects Law Student's Appeal Against Penalty Imposed For Indulging In Malpractice During Exams

Case Title: Arthi B AND Karnataka State Law University & OThers

Case No: WA 158/2025.

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 99

The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday dismissed an appeal filed by a law student challenging an order of the single judge which upheld the order of Karnataka State Law University, not permitting her to take future exams for indulging in malpractise during an examination.

A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice M I Arun dismissed the appeal filed by Arthi B and said “The aspect that petitioner admitted to writing on the hall ticket and using it while writing the examination paper, stands in the forefront. Once the candidate has accepted all other contentions pale into insignificance, in as much as the admission will rule the adjudicatory process.”

Special Investigation Team Of CID Not Vitiated Merely Because All Members Not From CID: Karnataka HC While Rejecting BJP MLA Munirathna's Plea

Case Title: Munirathna AND State Of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.1724 OF 2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 100

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by BJP MLA Munirathna, seeking to quash a case registered against him for allegedly demanding money from a contractor who had been entrusted under the Solid Waste Management Tender of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP).

The FIR is lodged under Sections 504, 506, 323, 385, 420 and 37 of the Indian Penal Code and is being investigated by the SIT. It is alleged that Munirathna had demanded money from the garbage collection contractor.

As the crimes against Munirathna had emerged from different informants for different offences, the State constituted a Special Investigation Team (SIT) of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID)

In-Laws Who Tortured Daughter-In-Law Cannot Walk Away Scot-Free Even If Charge For Demanding Dowry Is Dropped In Chargesheet: Karnataka HC

Case Title: H Sanna Devanna & ANR AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.103553 OF 2023

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 101

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash a criminal case against the in-laws of a woman who had tortured her.

Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed the petition filed by H Sanna Devanna and Shivagangamma who are charged under sections 504, 506, 498A, 323, 324 R/W 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

He said “There are pointed instances of torture meted out against the complainant. She has been assaulted by pulling her hair by both accused Nos.2 and 3, the petitioners herein. There are eye witnesses to the incident. The charge sheet depicts the screaming of the daughter-in-law, heard by a neighbor, who had come to her rescue. This being the observation in the summary of the charge sheet, merely because the offences under the Dowry Prohibition Act is dropped, it would not mean that mother-in-law and father-in-law, who have tortured the daughter-in-law, could walk away scot-free.”

Once Chargesheet Is Filed, Ticking Of Clock With Regard To Statutory Bail Automatically Stops: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Moulali Challal AND State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100051 OF 2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 102

While denying regular bail to a rape accused, the Karnataka High Court observed that once the chargesheet is filed within the stipulated time of 60 days from the date of the complaint, the right to seek the statutory bail extinguishes.

"It is needless to emphasise that once the charge sheet is filed, ticking of the clock with regarding to statutory right which is carved out in the Statute would automatically stop." Justice V Srishananda noted.

The accused/petitioner was charged under sections Section 376(2)(n), 506 of IPC and under Sections 4,6, 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. He challenged the Trial Court's order, which rejected his bail application.

"Worked For 34 Yrs, State Wants To Play With His Life": Karnataka HC Directs Release Of Terminal Benefits For 70-Yr-Old Retired Teacher

Case Title: M.A.DHAVALESHWAR AND THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.100271 OF 2022

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 103

The Karnataka High Court has come to the aid of a retired school teacher who has been fighting for his pension for the last 6 years. The court has directed the State Government and Rani Channamma University to release complete Death-cum-retirement benefits and encashment of privilege leave, including arrears of pension as claimed, within four weeks.

Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by M.A Dhavaleshwar and said, “It is un-understandable as to why the petitioner, despite working for 34 years, has not been paid complete pension as also leave encashment and gratuity amounts. The State wants to play with the life of the petitioner.”

Raising Voice Against Public Servant Does Not Amount To Offence U/S 353 Of IPC: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Ramesh Karoshi AND State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100090 OF 2024

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 104

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a criminal case registered against a home guard who was charged for raising his voice demanding certain documents from the hands of the complainant, a police constable.

Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by Ramesh Karoshi, who was charged for offences punishable under section 353, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

It was alleged that the petitioner had raised his voice and hurled abuses against the 2nd respondent complainant. The police conducted an investigation and filed a charge sheet against the petitioner.