Karnataka High Court Weekly Roundup: April 4 To April 10, 2022

A B Devaraju and Others v. State of Karnataka 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 100

NANJAPPA v. STATE BY CHIKKAJALA POLICE STATION  2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 101

 Faheem Ahmed V Union Of India  2022 Livelaw (Kar) 102

M. Surendra Rao v M. Raveendra Rao and others 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 104

Shanti Dhama College v The Principal Secretary 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 105

PRABHAMANI v. HEMALATHA  2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 106

Sayyad Mohammad @ Nasim V State Of Karnataka  2022 Livelaw (Kar) 108

Wing Commander G B Athri (Retired) v Union Of India  2022 Livelaw (Kar) 109

Iqbal Ahmed v C.B.I. SCB   2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 110

Karnataka State Legal Services Authority v. State Of Karnataka  2022 Livelaw (Kar) 111

Renuka W/O Anand @ Anantsa Bakale v Ramanand S/O Ramkrishnasa Basawa And Others  2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 112

Judgments/Orders/Reports

1: 'Impact On Environment Has To Be Kept In Mind': Karnataka High Court Directs State To Consider Representation Against Dumping Site Near River

Case Title: A B Devaraju and Others v. State of Karnataka    Case No: WP 6386/2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 100

The Karnataka High Court has directed the Deputy Commissioner of Mandya District to consider the representation to be given by petitioners seeking to shift the location of the site proposed for setting up a solid waste management unit. The proposed site is purportedly close to a river. A division bench of Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice S R Krishna Kumar said, "We, therefore, dispose of this writ petition with the observations that the petitioners may raise their grievance by way of fresh representation within a period of ten days from today before respondent No.4-Deputy Commissioner, DC Office, Mandya district, who may look into the matter and if need be, take an expert opinion, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law expeditiously, say, within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of this order along with the representation is placed before him."

2: Karnataka High Court Issues Guidelines To Curb Practice Of 'Fraud On Courts' For Securing Bail

Case Title: NANJAPPA v. STATE BY CHIKKAJALA POLICE STATION   Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1653/2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 101

Observing that "Unscrupulous litigants should not be allowed to pollute the stream of justice," the Karnataka High Court has issued directions to the Registry and District courts across the state to evolve mechanisms using modern technology to curb the practice of fraud on the court. A single judge bench of Justice H P Sandesh issued the following guidelines while rejecting the application filed by accused Nanjappa, who had filed multiple proceedings before various courts seeking anticipatory bail.

3: Karnataka High Court Refuses To Hear Plea Challenging Power Of Local Registrar Under Citizenship Rules To Declare 'Doubtful Citizen'

Case Title: Faheem Ahmed V Union Of India    Case No: Writ Petition No.1030 Of 2020

Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 102

The Karnataka High court has dismissed a petition seeking to declare as ultra vires the power of the local Registrar to verify and scrutinise the data so as to test the citizenship of an individual and consequently to declare him a doubtful citizen under the Citizenship (Registration of Citizen and issue of National Identity Cards) Rules 2003 as ultra vires.

4: Trial Court Must Decide Objections To Marking Of Documents Then & There Itself Instead Of Reserving It For Later Stage :Karnataka High Court

Case Title: M. Surendra Rao v M. Raveendra Rao and others    Case No: WRIT PETITION No.4290 OF 2017

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 104

The Karnataka High Court has said it is the duty of the trial court which records the evidence to then and there itself (immediately) hear on the objections and decide regarding the marking of the document and its admissibility. It cannot reserve the right of the parties to rake up the point at a later stage and get it marked as an exhibit and include it as evidence.

5: Authorities Accountable For Time Within Which Power Is Exercised': Karnataka HC Calls For Expeditious Disposal Of College Affiliation Applications

Case Title: Shanti Dhama College v The Principal Secretary    Case No: Writ Petition No.3503/2022 (Edn-Res)

Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 105

The Karnataka High Court has observed that applications made by colleges seeking affiliation/ recognition etc. for a specified academic year must be decided with "clock work precision" and final order granting or refusal of affiliation should be issued well before the commencement of that academic year. A single judge bench of Justice P. Krishna Bhat observed, "The filing of application seeking affiliation entails payment of considerably high fees. If decisions on such applications are not taken within a timeframe, they become irrelevant or infructuous due to efflux of time and thereby applicants suffer irreparable hardship."

6: Votes Not Invalid Merely Because They Were Cast On Ballot Papers From Another Constituency : Karnataka High Court

Case Title: PRABHAMANI v. HEMALATHA    Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.23811 OF 2021(LB-ELE)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 106

In a peculiar case, the Karnataka High Court recently allowed counting of ballot papers that belonged to another constituency after finding that there was "irrefutable evidence" to show that they were utilised for election in the constituency to which the parties before the Court belonged. The dispute pertained to elections to Karle Grama Panchayat. The Petitioner had obtained 232 votes and the Respondent had obtained 231 votes. This was on the basis of four votes that were initially rejected as not genuine, for being cast on ballot papers from another constituency.

7: NDPS Act | Chargesheet Without FSL Report Not Defective, No Ground For Default Bail U/S 167(2) CrPC: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Sayyad Mohammad @ Nasim V State Of Karnataka   Case No: Writ Petition No.5934 Of 2022

Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 108

The Karnataka High Court has held that an accused charged under the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS) Act does not get a right to default bail under Section 167(2) of CrPC, merely because the charge sheet/ final report filed by the Police after investigation is without FSL report.

8: Karnataka High Court Dismisses Plea Seeking Removal Of Alleged Anomalies In Centre's 'OROP Policy'

Case Title: Wing Commander G B Athri (Retired) v Union Of India    Case No: Writ Petition No.4237 Of 2021

Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 109

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed seeking directions to the Union Government to implement the recommendation of one-man judicial committee resolving anomalies in the implementation of One Rank One Pension (OROP) to all the pension drawing persons as on July 1, 2014.

9: Police Officer Not Obligated To Register FIR On Information About Offence "Likely To Take Place": Karnataka HighCourt

Case Title: Iqbal Ahmed v C.B.I. SCB    Case No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.538 of 2014

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 110

The Karnataka High Court has said it is not necessary to register FIR whenever a police officer receives information over the phone or in some other way about an offence which is likely to take place. It clarified that the mandate under Section 154 for registration of FIR comes into picture when cognizable offence "has been committed". Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar said, "It is not necessary to register FIR whenever a police officer receives information over the phone or in some other way about an offence which is likely to take place. Rather it is the duty of the police officer to take immediate measures to prevent the crime from happening, or if committed in his presence, to take action according to section 41 of Cr.P.C, FIR may be registered later on."

10: Karnataka High Court Puts In Abeyance Order Withholding Salary Of Principal Health Secretary For Failure To Install MRI Machines In DIMHANS

Case Title: Karnataka State Legal Services Authority v. State Of Karnataka   Case No: WP 18741/1996

Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 111

The Karnataka High Court has till April 21, put in abeyance its order directing not to disburse the salary of the Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare (Medical Education) for failing to install M.R.I. Scanning Machine at the Dharwad Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (DIMHANS). A division bench led by Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi had in November 2021, directed the State Government to upgrade DIMHANS, by March 1, 2022, to a higher psychiatry centre and to install and make operational the MRI Machine in the hospital.

11: Karnataka High Court Issues Guidelines For Ascertaining Genuineness Of Parties Before Recording Compromise

Case Title: Renuka W/O Anand @ Anantsa Bakale v Ramanand S/O Ramkrishnasa Basawa And Others    Case No: Writ Petition No. 103766 Of 2018

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 112

The Karnataka High Court has issued guidelines to be followed by courts and Lok Adalat for ascertaining the genuineness of the parties, before allowing a compromise decree, filed before it. A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj issued the directions in a petition filed by a party, claiming that its interest in the suit property was compromised by way of a compromise entered into by a person before the Lok Adalat claiming to be its power of attorney holder, without its knowledge.

Other reports

1: PIL Filed In Karnataka High Court Seeking Action Against Ministers, MLAs For Alleged Hate Speech

Case Title: Mohammed Khaleelulla v State of Karnataka

Case No: FR NO WP 6872/2022

A petition has been filed in the Karnataka High Court seeking direction to the state government to take action against the concerned public officials for failing to act against alleged hate speeches made by legislators and vigilante groups. The plea dubs such non-action as dereliction of duty and non-compliance of Supreme Court orders. The petitioner Mohammed Khaleelulla has also by way of interim relief prayed for a direction to the authorities to take suo-motu cognizance of all the hate speeches and initiate action for allegedly boycotting of Minority businesses, affecting livelihood of thousands of people.

2: High Court Stays Karnataka Govt's Order Making Kannada Compulsory Subject In Degree Courses

Case Title: Samskrita Bharati Karnataka Trust v. Union Of India

Case No: WP 18156/2021

The Karnataka High court on Wednesday stayed till further orders two Government orders issued in 2021, making Kannada language a compulsory subject in degree courses in the State. A division bench of Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice S R Krishna Kumar in its order said, "In view of the stand of the Central Government that the Kannada language cannot be made as compulsory subject in higher studies for the purpose of implementing National Education Policy. We prima facie find that the impugned GO dated 7/08/2021 and 15/09/2021 cannot be implemented. The operation of the GO's are stayed till further orders."