Karnataka High Court Monthly Digest: March 2023 [Citation 85 -133]

Nominal Index:

B Ranganath Hegde And Karnataka State Legal Services Authority & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 85

Kattemane Ganesha v. State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 86

M/s Inditrade Fincorp Pvt Ltd And Union of India & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 87

Jayanna B @ Jayaram And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 88

P S Leelavathi v. N Ravi Shankar & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 89

Karnataka Lokayuktha And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (kar) 90

Belandur GM Pan,Karyalaya And Government of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 91

Karnataka State Private Homoeopathic Medical College Managements Association And Union of India & oThers. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 92

The State of Karnataka Versus The Index Technologies India Ltd.. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 93

Basavanand Swamigalu And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 94

Syed Ghouse Mohiyuddin Shah Khadri And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 95

ABC & others And XYZ. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 96

A Manju And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 97

Vihaan Direct Selling India Private Limited And The Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement. 2023 Livelaw (kar) 98

M Venkateshappa And The Karnataka Information Commission & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 99

Nagalinga And The Excise Commissioner in Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 100

Murugan T And P. Jayagovinda Bhat & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 101

Mallikarjun Desai Goudar And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 102.

KARNATAKA UNAIDED SCHOOLS MANAGEMENTS ASSOCIATION And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 103

ABC Vs XYZ. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 104

ABC Vs XYZ. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 105

ABC And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 106

Jayamma & Others And State of Karnataka & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 107

Lakshminarayana And Lokesh L. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 108

Sameer Dinakar Bhole And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 109

Khaleel Ul Rehman & Others And Sharaffunnisa Muniri @ Ashraf Unnisa. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 110

M/s D C B Bank Limited And The Assistant Commissioner. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 111

Dr Sanjeev Kumar Hiremath And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 112

Dr Bhanu C Ramachandran And Union of India. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 113

M/S AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED And UNION OF INDIA. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 114

The Public Information Officer And The State Information Commissioner & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 115

Kavitha M And Raghu & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 116

Basangouda And Muddangouda & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 117

Bharatiya Janata Party And Election Commission of India & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 118

Master Arya Selvakumar Priya & ANR And Joint Secretary (PSP) and Chief Passport officer & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 119

Renuka Manghnani And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 120

M/s S P Metals Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes. 2023 LiveLaw (kar) 121

Omkarmurthy And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 122

HEALTHCARE GLOBAL ENTERPRISES LIMITED v. UNION OF INDIA & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 123

The Principal Secretary & ANR And Tejasco Techsoft Private Limited. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 124

K. Madal Virupakshappa And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 125

T Roopeshkumar @ Roopi And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 126

Sujata & Others And Nehru @ Kamagond Patil & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 127

Siddu And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 128

Anoop Bajaj And Jayanna. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 129

KM And KC & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 130

The Director (Exams) & Others And Ravishankar & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 131

Himayath Ali Khan v. Ministry of Home Affairs & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 132

M/S Patanjali Foods Limited Versus Union Of India. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 133

Judgments/Orders

Legal Services Authority Misinterpreted: Karnataka High Court Quashes Notices Demanding Excess Sitting Fees Drawn By Former Lok Adalat Member

Case Title: B Ranganath Hegde And Karnataka State Legal Services Authority & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 798 OF 2013

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 85

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the Demand notice/Communications issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, (KSLSA) and District Legal Services Authority (DLSA), to a former (now deceased) Member of the Permanent Lok Adalat, seeking to recover excess sitting fees drawn by him.

A single judge bench of Justice Jyoti Mulimani allowing the petition filed by B. Ranganath Hegde, quashed the Demand notice/ Communications dated 03.12.2012, 08.11.2012, 12.09.2012 and 31.08.2012 issued by KSLSA and District Legal Services Authority by which an amount of Rs 46,900 was sought to be recovered.

Karnataka High Court Orders Trial Court To Pass Fresh Verdict in Murder Case, Says Court Can't Ignore Cross-Examination While Considering Evidence

Case Title: Kattemane Ganesha v. State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL No.441 OF 2015 C/W CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1055 OF 2015

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 86

The Karnataka High Court has said trial courts dealing with criminal matters have to appreciate evidence as a whole and cannot ignore the cross-examination.

A division bench of Justice B Veerappa and Justice Rajesh Rai K allowed the appeals filed by a murder convict Kattemane Ganesha and the victim in the same case. While Ganesha had challenged the order convicting him in the murder case, the victim had challenged the acquittal of the co-accused.

Karnataka High Court Refuses To De-Freeze Fintech Inditrade's Bank Accounts Amid ED's Probe Into Alleged Chinese Links

Case Title: M/s Inditrade Fincorp Pvt Ltd And Union of India & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.25172 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 87

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by M/s Inditrade Fincorp Ltd, challenging the order passed by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) freezing its bank account under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

The freezing order is passed on allegations that the petitioner disbursed small loans to small borrowers, through payment gateways while having an agreement with another company which allegedly has links to China.

S.33(5) POCSO Act Does Not Mean Accused Will Not Be Given Any Opportunity To Cross- Examine Prosecutrix: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Jayanna B @ Jayaram And State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3987 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 88

The Karnataka High Court has set aside an order passed by the Special Court which rejected the application made by an accused being tried under the provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, (POCSO) to recall the prosecutrix (victim) from cross-examination.

A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan observed, “Of course, as per Section 33 of the POCSO Act, the prosecutrix/victim shall not be called frequently for cross examination by the Court. However, that does not mean there shall not be any opportunity given to the accused for the purpose of cross-examination of the prosecution witness.”

Plea For Holding Inquisition, Appointing Guardian For Mentally Ill Person Lies Before Court In Whose Limits Such Person Resides: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: P S Leelavathi v. N Ravi Shankar & others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.42752 OF 2018

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 89

The Karnataka High Court has clarified that an application under Sections 50, 52 of the Mental Health Act for holding judicial inquisition and appointment of guardian for a mentally ill person, has to be made within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the alleged mentally ill person resides and not where his/her property is situated.

A single judge bench of Justice K S Hemalekha made the clarification while setting aside an order dated 02-11-2017, passed by a civil court in Bengaluru and allowing the application made by petitioner P.S. Leelavathi, made under Section 50 (1) (d) of the Act.

https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/karnataka-high-court-power-of-disciplinary-authority-to-impose-lesser-penalty-government-official-karnataka-lokayukta-222998

Case Title: Karnataka Lokayuktha And State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 7122 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (kar) 90

The Karnataka High Court has said that recommendation made by Lokayukta for imposition of a particular penalty on a government official after due inquiry made does not take away the power of the disciplinary authority to impose a lesser penalty on the official.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna rejected the petition filed by the Karnataka Lokayuktha questioning an order dated 06.09.2021 by which the second respondent (Chandrashekhar) was imposed a penalty, which falls short of a recommendation made by it for imposition of particular penalty.

https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/karnataka-high-court-bellandur-lake-pollution-ngt-environmental-damage-water-pollution-223004

Case Title: Belandur GM Pan,Karyalaya And Government of Karnataka

Case No: Wp 13473/1998

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 91

The Karnataka High Court on Friday disposed of a petition filed 25 years ago raising a grievance about certain activities causing pollution in the tank bed area of Bellandur Lake.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Ashok S Kinagi disposed of the petition filed by Belandur Gram Panchayat Karyalaya and others. The bench said “Admittedly when the petition was filed there were no specific laws dealing with the issues of pollution and environmental damage. Further admittedly during passage of time the necessary laws have been framed having the provisions to deal with issues of air/water pollution and damage to ecology and environment.”

https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/karnataka-high-court-neet-homeopathy-courses-neet-223105

Case Title: Karnataka State Private Homoeopathic Medical College Managements Association And Union of India & oThers

Case NO: W.P. No.25723 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 92

The Karnataka High Court has upheld the Constitutional validity of provision of the National Commission for Homeopathy Act, 2020, which provides that there shall be a Uniform National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) for admission to undergraduate Homoeopathy courses in all the institutions governed under the Act.

A division bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Vijaykumar A Patil disposed of the petition filed by Karnataka State Private Homoeopathic Medical College Managements Association which had sought to strike down certain provisions of the Act and Regulations framed thereunder, claiming them to be unconstitutional.

https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/charger-sold-with-mobile-phone-taxed-karnataka-high-court-223059

Case Title: The State of Karnataka Versus The Index Technologies India Ltd.

Case No STRP No. 8 Of 202

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 93

The Karnataka High Court has held that the charger, which is sold along with the mobile phone in one set, is taxable at the rate of 5%.

The division bench of Justice P.S. Dinesh Kumar and Justice T.G. Shivashankare Gowda has observed that the main intention of a purchaser or seller while buying or selling a "mobile set" is to buy or sell the mobile phone and not the charger alone. The supply of chargers, headsets, and ejection pins is incidental to the sale. Therefore, the dominant intention test would apply, and hence, the charger cannot be differently taxed.

Karnataka High Court Directs Police To Register Visually Challenged Person's Complaint Under PwD Act Instead Of Relegating Him To Common Law Remedy

Case Title: Basavanand Swamigalu And State of Karnataka

Case No: WP 100082/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 94

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that a disabled person raising a complaint under provisions of the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, cannot be directed to seek relief under common law remedy.

A single judge bench of S R Krishna Kumar allowed the petition filed by visually challenged Basavanand Swamigalu and set aside a communication issued by the police rejecting his complaint.

Karnataka High Court Upholds Single Judge Order Against State's Decision Permitting Only Muslim Priest To Perform Rituals At Datta Peeta

Case Title: Syed Ghouse Mohiyuddin Shah Khadri And State of Karnataka

Case No: WA 1110/2021

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 95

The Karnataka High Court on Monday dismissed an appeal challenging a Single Judge's order which quashed State's decision to permit only a Mujawar (Muslim Priest) to perform the rituals at the Datta Peeta - a holy cave shrine in Chikmaguluru which is revered both by Hindus and Muslim communities.

Also Read - Motor Accident | Remarriage Not A Taboo Against Compensation To Widow Of Deceased: Bombay High Court

The State had ordered that only a Mujawar appointed by Shah Khadri shall be permitted to enter the sanctum of the "Sri Guru Dattathreya Swamy Peeta" otherwise known as "Sree Gurudattathreya Bababudnaswamy Dargha" cave and to distribute 'teertha' to both Hindus and Muslims.

[Domestic Violence Act] Court Can Order Husband To Pay Wife Monetary Expenses In Lieu Of Shared House: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: ABC & others And XYZ

Case No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 200071 OF 2016

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 96

The Karnataka High Court recently modified an order passed by the Trial court which directed a woman be paid Rs.6,000 as monthly maintenance and a room be given to her for living in the shared house of the estranged husband.

A single judge bench of Justice V Srishananda allowed the memo filed by the estranged husband who undertook to pay maintenance amount of Rs.6,000 per month and also pay an additional amount of Rs 5,000 for alternate accommodation to the woman.

Karnataka High Court Directs Police, Election Commission To Provide Proper Training To Officials On Procedure For FIR Registration During Polls

Case Title: A Manju And State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10435 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 97

The Karnataka High Court has directed the Chief Election Commission, State Election Commission and the Police Department to provide proper training to the officials, who are attached to the Election flying squad, on the procedure to be followed while reporting offences pertaining to Election Code violation.

A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan said most of the cases registered by the Police on the complaint filed by flying squad remain only as an empty formality during the election and finally in most of the cases, the Police files 'B' final report when the candidate is elected or files the charge-sheet against the losing candidate, "even though the police knowing very well that in a non-cognizable offence, the FIR cannot be registered without permission of the Magistrate.”

Cannot Interfere With ED Case Registered In Another State : Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Vihaan Direct Selling India Private Limited And The Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.2576 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 Livelaw (kar) 98

The Karnataka High Court has held that it cannot interfere with criminal proceedings initiated by the Directorate of Enforcement in Mumbai merely on the ground that the accused is staying and operating a bank account in Karnataka.

A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan dismissed the petition filed by Vihaan Direct Selling India Private Limited which had approached the Court seeking to quash the case registered in 2013 by the Enforcement Directorate and to declare that the search conducted under Section 17 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act as illegal and unconstitutional.

Information Commission Bound To Hear PIO Before Imposing Penalty For Alleged Violation Of RTI Act: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: M Venkateshappa And The Karnataka Information Commission & ANR

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 22745 OF 2018

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 99

The Karnataka High Court has said if an order is passed by the Karnataka State Information Commission imposing penalty on a Public Information Officer, without considering the written explanation submitted by him or permitting him opportunity to give oral explanation, then the order is in violation of the principles of natural justice and is liable to be quashed.

A single judge bench of Justice Jyoti Mulimani allowed the petition filed by M Venkateshappa, and quashed the order of the Commission dated 18.01.2008 by which it imposed a penalty of Rs.10,000 on the petitioner.

Karnataka Excise Act | A Partner Cannot Apply For Renewal Of Licence While His Lawsuit For Dissolution Of Firm Is Pending: High Court

Case Title: Nagalinga And The Excise Commissioner in Karnataka & Others.

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.23306 OF 2021

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 100

The Karnataka High Court has held that a partner who files suit seeking dissolution of the partnership firm and which is pending adjudication, cannot seek for renewal of licence under the Karnataka Excise Act, for continuance of the business.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj allowed the petition filed by one Nagalinga and quashed order dated 08.12.2021 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, by which it confirmed the order of the Excise Commission renewing the licence on an application made by respondent No.3 (Y B Ramachandra).

Mere 'Smell Of Alcohol' From Injured Does Not Disentitle His Claim In Motor Accident: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Murugan T And P. Jayagovinda Bhat & ANR

Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 554 OF 2020

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 101

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that even if a person was intoxicated or smelling with alcohol, the same cannot be an excuse for the driver of a bus for causing the road traffic accident and causing injuries to the injured person.

A single judge bench of Justice Dr H B Prabhakara Sastry allowed the petition filed by claimant Murugan T and set aside the order rejecting the claim petition filed by the petition and remanded the matter back to the Tribunal for consideration of the issue regarding entitlement of compensation to the claimant and quantum and from whom.

Length Of Relationship Considerable Factor In Rape Case Over False Promise To Marry: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Mallikarjun Desai Goudar And State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.4761 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 102

The Karnataka High Court has quashed charges of rape levelled against an accused who was booked on the complaint made by the victim, after the accused refused to marry her on being in a relationship with her for over five years.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna partly allowed the petition filed by Mallikarjun Desai Goudar and quashed charges levelled under sections 376, 376(2)(n), 354, 406 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. The court sustained the charges against him under sections 323 and 506 r/w 34 of the IPC.

No Board Exams For 5th And 8th Class Students In State Board: Karnataka High Court Quashes Govt Circulars

Case Title: KARNATAKA UNAIDED SCHOOLS MANAGEMENTS ASSOCIATION And State of Karnataka

Case No: WP 5017/2023 C/w 1699/2023, 1668/2023,

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 103

The Karnataka High Court on Friday quashed three circulars issued by the State government by which it prescribed a Board Examination for students of Standards 5 and 8th in schools affiliated to the state board.

A single judge bench of Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur, allowed the petitions filed by Organisation for Unaided Recognised Schools and the Registered Unaided Private Schools’ Management Association Karnataka and Karnataka Unaided Schools Management Association.

Karnataka High Court Refuses To Repatriate Minor To Germany, Says No Habeas Corpus Jurisdiction In Face Of Interim Order Giving Custody To Mother

Case Title: ABC Vs XYZ

Case No: W.P.H.C. NO.46 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 104

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a habeas corpus petition filed by a man seeking direction to his wife to produce their minor son before the court and then direct his repatriation to Germany.

A division bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Vijaykumar A Patil dismissed the petition filed by the father, it said, “The interim custody of the son has been granted to the wife by an interim order dated 08.06.2017 passed by the family court. The aforesaid interim order is still in force. Therefore, in violation of the aforesaid interim order, which binds the parties, this court in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction would not direct repatriation of the son to Germany.”

Indian Divorce Act | Karnataka High Court Declares Marriage As Void Saying Woman Misrepresented And Concealed Her Real Age From Husband

Case Title: ABC Vs XYZ

Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5183 OF 2016

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 105

The Karnataka High Court has declared a Christian couple's marriage as null and void holding that the woman had misrepresented and concealed her real age at the time of marriage.

A division bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Vijaykumar Patil allowed the petition filed by the husband questioning the order of the family court rejecting his petition filed under Section 18 of the Indian Divorce Act. The family court had held that petitioner (husband) failed to prove the grounds to declare his marriage with the respondent as null and void.

Juvenile Directed To Be Tried As Adult Can Seek Bail From Children's Court U/S 12 JJ Act, Need Not Resort To CrPC: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: ABC And State of Karnataka

Case No: CRL.R.P. NO. 1372 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 106

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that once an order is passed under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, holding that a child in conflict with law is required to be tried for heinous offences as an adult, the JJ Board has no jurisdiction to consider the bail application pending before it.

A single judge bench of Justice S Vishwajith Shetty added, "As against the said order, the juvenile has an option to file an appeal before the Sessions Court under Section 101(2) of the Act or he may also choose to file an application under Section 12 of the Act before the Children's Court to which his case is transferred."

'Reflects Mindset Of East India Company Era': Karnataka High Court Pulls Up BDA For Denying TDR Certificates To Landowners

Case Title: Jayamma & Others And State of Karnataka & others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 20671 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 107

The Karnataka High Court has while quashing an order passed by the Bangalore Development Authority denying TDR Certificates (Transfer of Development Rights) as promised to land owners while acquiring their lands for public purpose, observed, “A bare perusal of the impugned order gives an impression that it is texted with the mindset of a Draftsman of East India Company of the bygone era and not by the one whose heart is at the right place.”

A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit allowed the petitions filed by Jayamma and Others and quashed the order dated 17.03.2022 issued by the Respondent - BDA whereby, the recommendation of the respondent —BBMP for issuing the TDR Certificates to them has been negatived.

NI Act | Hardship To Accused No Ground To Not Release Interim Compensation In Favour Of Complainants: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Lakshminarayana And Lokesh L

Case NO: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1189 OF 2023 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1151 OF 2023 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1153 OF 2023 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1158 OF 2023 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1311 OF 2023 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1346 OF 2023 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1350 OF 2023 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1355 OF 2023 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1356 OF 2023.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 108

The Karnataka High Court has quashed an order passed by the appellate court refusing to release interim compensation deposited by the accused convicted under Negotiable Instruments Act in favour of complainants.

A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan allowed a batch of petitions and directed that 20% of the amount in deposit be released to the petitioners - complainants with due identification, with a condition that they shall refund the amount within 60 days from the date of the order or plus 30 days, as per the proviso to Section 148(3) of the NI Act, if the accused is acquitted by the Appellate Court.

Sexually Harassing In Open Spaces Like Mall & Office Highly Improbable: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Sameer Dinakar Bhole And State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 697 OF 2020

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 109

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a sexual harassment complaint lodged by an employee against her manager three days before her work contract with the private company was to end.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by Delivery Center Manager of M/s Mindtree Company Limited and quashed the prosecution against him initiated under section 354 (A) and section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

S.125 CrPC | Step Mother May Seek Maintenance From Step Children By Showing Evidence That Deceased Husband Had Properties: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Khaleel Ul Rehman & Others And Sharaffunnisa Muniri @ Ashraf Unnisa

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8508 OF 2022 CONNECTED WITH WRIT PETITION NO.14494 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 110

The Karnataka High Court has said that a stepmother, to claim maintenance amount from legal heirs of her deceased husband, has to prove before the family court by tendering evidence and submission of documents that her husband was having a lot of properties and they are having income and thus she is entitled for maintenance amount.

A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan partly allowed a petition filed by Khaleel Ul-Rehman, setting aside and modifying the order passed by the family court granting Rs 25,000 per month maintenance to their step mother.

Mortgage Security Acquired: Karnataka High Court Applies Doctrine Of Substituted Security, Orders Compensation Deposit Until Adjudication Of Rights

Case Title: M/s D C B Bank Limited And The Assistant Commissioner

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 18206 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 111

The Karnataka High Court has said that a mortgagee (secured creditor/Bank) gets rights over the compensation amount to be disbursed when the property which is mortgaged with it is acquired by the state government, as per Section 73 of the Transfer of Property Act.

A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit allowed a petition filed by M/s D C B Bank Limited and directed Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) to refer the claim of Petitioner – Bank forthwith to the Court of I Additional District Judge, Chitradurga, with all necessary papers, with intimation to the Petitioner. The Court after notice to all the stakeholders, shall adjudge the claim of Petitioner-Bank, within an outer limit of one year.

‘A Case And A Counter Case Have To Be Tried Together’: Karnataka High Court Allows Transfer Of Criminal Proceedings To Single Court

Case Title: Dr Sanjeev Kumar Hiremath And State of Karnataka Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2459 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 112

The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that a case and a counter case have to be tried together by the same court irrespective of the nature of offences involved, to avoid conflicting judgments over the same incident.

A single judge bench of Justice Mohammad Nawaz allowed the petition filed by one Dr Sanjeev Kumar Hiremath and transferred the case filed by him pending before the Magistrate court in Bengaluru under sections 341, 324, 504 and 506 to the Special Session court where the offence registered by the accused against Hiremath under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1989 is also pending.

Pay MBBS Fees As Per NRI Quota To Get Exit Permit: Karnataka High Court To US-Born Student Who Pursued Medical Under Govt Quota

Case Title: Dr Bhanu C Ramachandran And Union of India

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.24609 of 2021

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 113

The Karnataka High court has directed Union of India and the Bureau of Immigration to issue exit permit to a 26-year-old USA born student who misrepresented herself as Indian Citizen and pursued MBBS course under government quota, subject to her paying fees of the MBBS course at the rate that would be charged to NRI/overseas citizen of India.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna took a lenient view and partly allowed the petition filed by Dr. Bhanu C Ramachandran. The bench said “The petitioner has shamelessly resorted to falsehood and achieved her goals by unethical means. The petitioner is not even wanting to pursue her career in this country, having secured benefits throughout her career contending that she is an Indian.”

Karnataka High Court Paves Way For De-Freezing Amnesty International's Bank Accounts, Says ED's 2018 Notice Was Valid Only For 60 Days

Case Title: M/S AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED And UNION OF INDIA

Case NO: WP 56621/2018

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 114

The Karnataka High Court recently quashed the communication issued by Enforcement Directorate (ED) in 2018 to banks, directing them to freeze accounts of NGO M/s Amnesty International (India) Private Limited, alleging violation of provisions of Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, (FEMA).

A single judge bench of Justice K S Hemalekha said in view of Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, ED's notice was valid only for 60 days. "The impugned notices dated 25/10/2018 at Annexures-F1 and F2 have lost their efficacy by efflux of time as the period of sixty days has expired," it said.

[RTI Act] Second Appeal By PIO Maintainable Even If He Did Not File First Appeal U/S 19(1): Karnataka High Court

Case Title: The Public Information Officer And The State Information Commissioner & others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.24537 OF 2018

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 115

The Karnataka High Court has set aside the order passed by the Karnataka State Information Commissioner dismissing the second appeal filed by the Public Information Officer, on the ground that the petitioner being the PIO cannot maintain the second appeal under Section 19(3) of the Right to Information Act.

A single judge bench of Justice K S Hemalekha partly allowed the petition filed by the PIO attached to the Karnataka Lokayukta and set aside the order dated 04.01.2018 passed by Commissioner.

Domestic Violence Victims Must Be Addressed With Immediacy: Karnataka High Court Issues Directions For Timely Disposal By Magistrate Courts

Case Title: Kavitha M And Raghu & Others

Case NO: WRIT PETITION No.12703 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 116

The Karnataka High Court has issued directions to be followed by magistrate courts for disposal of applications being made by an aggrieved person under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, within 60 days from the date of its filing.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna said “The law Courts which exist to remedy the wrong when it is brought to its notice has to act swiftly, as it is trite that, actus curiae neminem gravabit that the act of Court should prejudice no person. If an act of the Court should not prejudice any person; the Court should not permit any procrastination of the proceedings before it.”

Hindu Female Becomes 'Absolute Owner' Of Partitioned Property, Can't Devolve On Siblings But Would Be Subject To Succession: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Basangouda And Muddangouda & Others

Case No: REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 7094 OF 2010

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 117

The Karnataka High Court has held that a female Hindu becomes the absolute owner of the property on acquisition of property by way of a partition deed agreed upon in the family and the property cannot be termed as acquisition by inheritance and thus would not revert to the siblings on her death.

A single judge bench of Justice C M Joshi sitting at Kalaburagi, allowed the appeal filed by Basangouda and set aside the orders of the trial and first appellate court which held that Section 15(2) of the Hindu Succession Act was attracted in respect of the suit property held by his deceased wife Eshwaramma allotted under a partition deed, and thus it would devolve back to her siblings.

Swiftly Rectify Discrepancies In Electoral Rolls Of Shivajinagar, Shanthi Nagar Assembly Constituencies: Karnataka High Court Directs ECI

Case Title: Bharatiya Janata Party And Election Commission of India & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 3592 OF 2023 C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 2632 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 118

The Karnataka High Court has directed the Election Commission of India to act swiftly and conclude the exercise of correcting the electoral rolls in Shivaji Nagar and Shanthi Nagar constituencies in Bengaluru, by identifying voters who have expired and those who have shifted to other areas, by March 26.

Bharatiya Janata Party had approached the High court seeking consideration of their representations submitted on 30-11-2022 and 23-01-2023 to the Commission for corrective measures to be taken in the electoral roll concerning Shivajinagar Assembly Constituency.

Karnataka High Court Directs Centre To Issue Indian Passport To 'Stateless' Minor Till He Turns Major, Says Can't Ignore 'Cry Of Such Child'

Case Title: Master Arya Selvakumar Priya & ANR And Joint Secretary (PSP) and Chief Passport officer & others

Case NO: WRIT PETITION No.21642 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 119

The Karnataka High Court has come to the aid of a 15-year-old child by directing the Passport Officer, Bengaluru to issue him an Indian Passport. The court said the travel document will remain operational till he turns 18 years old, or else he would be rendered Stateless.

Justice M Nagaprasanna said that merely because the minor's father is not traceable and the mother "has been reckless" in not knowing the consequences of renouncement of citizenship, the fate of the child cannot be left in limbo.

Karnataka High Court Asks State To Put In Place Proper Methodology For Timely Disposal Of e-Khata Applications, Seeks Compliance Report

Case Title: Renuka Manghnani And State of Karnataka

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.4821 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 120

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that whenever a manual khata (property document) is issued, e-khata is to be issued immediately on an application being made, otherwise, the very purpose of implementing the system of e-khata would be lost.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj directed the Principal Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department and the Secretary, e-Governance Department, to institute and put in effect a system for proper methodology of consideration of the application, processing the application and disposal of the application for filing of e-khata, on the website of the Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department under each Gram Panchayat.

Karnataka High Court Permitted Superintendent of Central Tax To Pass Orders For Revoking Cancellation Of GST Registration On Filing Returns

Case Title: M/s S P Metals Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

Case No: Writ Petition No. 1135 Of 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 121

The Karnataka High Court has permitted the Superintendent of Central Tax to pass suitable orders for revocation of the cancellation of the GST registration, if the petitioner/assessee files returns. The single bench of Justice B. M. Shyam Prasad has observed that the cancellation of GST registration was without due opportunity and was arbitrary.

Life Convicts Release Committee Must Meet Once In 2 Months: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Omkarmurthy And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 1300 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 122

The Karnataka High Court has directed the state government to ask the Life Convicts Release Committee, headed by the Principal Secretary, State Home Department, to meet once in two months to review and pass orders on applications made for premature release/remission made by convicts serving life imprisonment.

“I deem it appropriate to direct the State Government to henceforth direct the 2nd respondent/Committee to meet at least 6 times a year – once in two months, so that those application/s are considered at the right time on their individual merit and cases being filed only to place the application/s before the committee would be obviated,” said the court.

Karnataka High Court Dismisses Appeal Against 30% Cap On Trade Margin Of 42 Anti-Cancer Drugs

Case Title: HEALTHCARE GLOBAL ENTERPRISES LIMITED v. UNION OF INDIA & Others

Case No: WRIT Appeal No: 83/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 123

The Karnataka High Court on Monday dismissed an appeal filed challenging a single judge bench order dated November 30, 2022, which had upheld a 2019 order issued by the Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilisers imposing a cap of 30% on trade margin of 42 anti-Cancer Drugs.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice M G S Kamal dismissed the appeal filed by Healthcare Global Enterprises Ltd. “For reasons to be recorded separately, appeal is dismissed,” said the court.

Order XXI Rule 11 CPC | Judgment Debtor Cannot Be Arrested In Proceedings For Execution Of Arbitration Award: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: The Principal Secretary & ANR And Tejasco Techsoft Private Limited

Case NO: WRIT PETITION NO. 4525 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 124

The Karnataka High Court has set aside an order passed by the Commercial Court, Bengaluru, ordering the arrest of the Principal Secretary and Commissioner of Department of Health and Family Welfare in an execution proceeding.

A single judge bench Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar set aside the order dated 15-02-2023, saying it is "patently illegal”. The respondent Tejasco Techsoft Private Limited had sought to execute the award passed in arbitration and they made an application under section 60 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking attachment of movables and immovables found in the office of the petitioners.

Karnataka High Court Dismisses BJP MLA Madal Virupakshappa's Plea For Anticipatory Bail In Bribery Case

Case Title: K. Madal Virupakshappa And State of Karnataka

Case No: Criminal Petition No 1976/2023

Citation 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 125

The Karnataka High Court on Monday dismissed the anticipatory bail application filed by BJP Leader Madal Virupakshappa in the alleged bribery case. The court had granted him interim anticipatory bail on March 7.

Virupakshappa was the Chairman of KSDL but resigned after his son V Prashanth Madal was allegedly caught red-handed by the Lokayukta while accepting a bribe in relation to a contract.

A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan had reserved the order on March 17, after hearing both parties. The petitioner’s counsel had contended that there is absolutely no material to attract the provisions of Section 7 (a) (b) or (A) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Person Against Whom Externment Order Is Passed Must Be Supplied 'Report' Leading To Such Decision: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: T Roopeshkumar @ Roopi And State of Karnataka

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.392 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 126

The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that under Section 58 of the Karnataka Police Act, the report based on which a person is to be externed must be mandatorily supplied to such person along with the notice so issued.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by T Roopeshkumar @ Roopi and said “The provision makes it mandatory for grant of reasonable opportunity and also permits the person against whom order of externment is to be passed to call any witness and examine him by filing an application.”

Service Benefits Do Not Form Bequeathable Estate Of Any Government Servant: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Sujata & Others And Nehru @ Kamagond Patil & others

Case No: REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 7144 OF 2011

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 127

The Karnataka High Court has held that service benefits do not form the bequeathable estate of any government servant.

A single judge bench of Justice C M Joshi sitting at Kalaburagi dismissed the appeal filed by Sujata and others challenging the judgment of the trial court which was confirmed by the Senior Civil Judge vide its order dated 04.03.2011. The trial court and appellate court had decreed the suit filed by the appellants holding that Will of deceased Kalpana is proved by the plaintiffs but deceased could not have bequeathed the service benefits to the appellants, her sisters.

Karnataka High Court Stays Externment Order Against BSc Student For Two Weeks To Allow Him Appear For Scheduled Examinations

Case Title: Siddu And State of Karnataka

Case NO: WRIT PETITION NO. 102074 OF 2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 128

Coming to the aid of a student pursuing B.Sc course, the Karnataka High Court has stayed for two weeks the execution and operation of the externment order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, against him, to enable him to appear for examinations.

A single judge bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum sitting at Dharwad bench disposed of the petition filed by Siddu (20), who had approached the court questioning the Assistant Commissioner’s order passed under Section 55 of the Karnataka Police Act, externing him from Jamakhandi to Sedam Taluk on the ground that there is reasonable apprehension that he would engage in commission of offences.

Circulating Defamatory Cartoons In Institution's Internal Newspaper Against Expelled Member Attracts Charges U/S 500 IPC: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Anoop Bajaj And Jayanna

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6639 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 129

The Karnataka High Court recently refused to quash the defamation proceedings pending against the President of Bowring Institute, who allegedly circulated objectionable cartoons defaming the complainant (an expelled member of the institute), in the newsletter to other members of the institute.

A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan dismissed the petition filed by Anoop Bajaj and said “Sending the defamatory statement and the cartoons directly insulting the respondent by way of such statement, attracts Section 499 of IPC and it is not sent in good faith by the public authority in order to attract Exception 8 to Section 499 of IPC.”

Trial Court Can Only Alter Or Add To Charges Already Framed, Can't Delete A Charge: Karnataka HC Allows Plea Against Deletion Of Charges In Rape Case

Case Title: KM And KC & ANR

Case No: CRL.R.P. NO. 919 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 130

The Karnataka High Court has held that under Section 216 of Criminal Procedure Code, a trial court can only alter the charge or add to the charge which is already framed. It cannot delete a charge which has been already framed by it, said the court

A single judge bench of Justice S Vishwajith Shetty said: “If a charge is framed by the Trial Court for an offence which is not made out by the prosecution by producing sufficient material during the course of the trial, the Court can always acquit the accused for the said offence or the Court can punish the accused for lesser offences but after framing of charge before pronouncement of final judgment, the Court has no power to delete any charge which is framed by it.”

Karnataka High Court Permits Class X Student To Take Exams Without Opting For Kannada, Dismisses Appeal Against Single Bench Order

Case Title: The Director (Exams) & Others And Ravishankar & ANR

Case No: WA 363/2023

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 131

The Karnataka High Court on Thursday dismissed the Director of Karnataka Secondary Education Examination Board's appeal against an order of the Single judge bench that permitted a 10th standard student of Vidya Bharathi English School to take exams without opting for Kannada as one of the three languages.

The State government has introduced Kannada Language Learning Rules, 2017. All schools, be it CBSE or ICSE, have to mandatorily impart Kannada as one of the subjects.

'Not Accused In Any Crime, Not Shown As Guarantor To Loan': Karnataka High Court Allows Businessman To Travel To Saudi Arabia, UAE

Case Title: Himayath Ali Khan v. Ministry of Home Affairs & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.24074 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 132

The Karnataka High Court has permitted a businessman,against whom a look out notice was issued by the Bureau of Immigration in connection with a loan default case, to travel to UAE and Saudi Arabia.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna disposed of the petition filed by Himayath Ali Khan and said. “The petitioner is authorized to travel to United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia for a brief period, which is made subject to filing an affidavit of undertaking before this Court that he would complete his work and come back to the shores of the nation within the time as indicated in the said affidavit from the date he starts his journey.”

DGFT Has No Authority To Violate The Foreign Trade Policy, Power Lies Only With Central Govt: Karnataka High court

Case Title: M/S Patanjali Foods Limited Versus Union Of India

Case No: Writ Petition No.14963 Of 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 133

The Karnataka High Court has held that only the Central Government can make provision for prohibiting, restricting, or regulating the import or export of goods or services, or technology and not the Director General of Foreign Trade (DGFT).

The single bench of Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar has observed that only the Central Government can formulate and announce the Foreign Trade Policy by ‘Notification’ in the Official Gazette and may also, in like manner, amend that policy. The power of the Central Government to formulate and amend the Foreign Trade Policy cannot be exercised by DGFT. As per Section 3(2) of Foreign Trade (Regulation and Development Act), 1992 (FTDR Act), only the Central Government can by Order published in the Official Gazette make provisions for prohibiting, restricting, or regulating the import or export of goods or services or technology and the power of the Central Government cannot be exercised by the DGFT.