Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: November 11 - November 17, 2024

Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 464 To 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 471Nominal Index:B C Hanumantharaju AND Kavyashree & ANR. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 464Khaja Hussain AND State of Karnataka. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 465Nagaraj G K AND THE HON'BLE ADDL. LABOUR COMMISSIONER & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 466Nagaraj G K AND THE HON'BLE ADDL. LABOUR COMMISSIONER & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 466UNION BANK OF INDIA AND State of Karnataka. Citation no: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 467Master Shamant P & Others AND Union of India & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 468Karan Dhanajaya AND Bar Council of India & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 469N Shreyas & ANR AND The Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 470Jabir Ali Khan alias Shuja AND Karnataka State Board of Wakfs & Others. 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 471Judgments/OrdersFather Legally Bound To Maintain Daughters, Provide 'Excellent Education' Even If They Live With Mother After Divorce: Karnataka High CourtCase Title: B C Hanumantharaju AND Kavyashree & ANRCase No: REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 313 OF 2023Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 464While dismissing a man's plea challenging an order to maintain his daughters including a minor, the Karnataka High Court underscored that the father is "legally bound to maintain the daughters" and provide them with an "excellent education"even if they are living separately with his ex-wife.A single judge bench of Justice Ashok S Kinagi held thus while dismissing a petition filed by one B C Hanumantharaju challenging an order of maintenance issued by the trial court. The trial court vide its order dated 07-03-2023, directed him to pay Rs.6,000 per month to each of his daughters including a minor till they get married. It had further directed him to pay Rs.1,04,000 to the respondents towards educational expenses incurred during the current academic year.Accused Exercising Right Of Silence Not Bound To Prove Consent Was Taken When Prosecution Is Unable To Prove Rape: Karnataka HCCase Title: Khaja Hussain AND State of KarnatakaCase No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 200109 OF 2014Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 465The Karnataka High Court has said that there is no duty on the accused to prove a defence of consent in a matter of rape, and his exercise of his right to remain silent would be sufficient where the prosecution itself is unable to prove its case.The court said that as the right of the accused to remain silent would fasten the burden on the prosecution to prove absence of consent during sexual intercourse; if it fails to discharge such burden, the case of the prosecution would fall on its own weight. If prosecution does not discharge the burden beyond reasonable doubt it would make the accused entitled to acquittal, it added.Appellate Authority Under POSH Act Can Stay Final Report Of Internal Complaints Committee Pending Final Decision: Karnataka High CourtCase Title: Nagaraj G K AND THE HON'BLE ADDL. LABOUR COMMISSIONER & OthersCase No: WRIT PETITION NO. 28361 OF 2024Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 466The Karnataka High Court has held that there is no express bar under provisions of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 and Rules, for the appellate authority to consider an application for stay in appeal against the final report of the Internal Complaints Committee.A single judge bench of Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav said “The appellate authority despite the absence of specific provision for granting of interim order would have the power to consider the interim application.”Karnataka High Court Rejects Plea To Transfer Probe In Valmiki Corporation "Scam" To CBICase Title: UNION BANK OF INDIA AND State of KarnatakaCase No: WP 17274/2024Citation no: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 467The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday (November 13) dismissed a petition filed by Union Bank of India seeking a direction to the government to transfer the probe being carried out in the alleged scam regarding the Karnataka Maharshi Valmiki Scheduled Tribes Development Corporation Ltd, to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna while pronouncing the verdict orally said, "I have not accepted the interpretation of Section 35A (Banking Regulation Act) to become a ground for reference to CBI. If I permit that every banking institution may ask. DSP Act may become redundant"Priority In Admission To Kendriya Vidyalaya Not A Vested Right: Karnataka HC Declines Plea By Students Seeking 'Grandparents Sponsoring Quota'Case Title: Master Shamant P & Others AND Union of India & OthersCase No: WRIT APPEAL No. 1305 OF 2024Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 468The Karnataka High Court has said that priority in admission to school cannot be construed to be a vested right and priority provided in the previous academic year cannot be enforced as a legal right for continuation of such quota.A Division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind held thus while dismissing an appeal filed by...

Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: November 11 - November 17, 2024

Mustafa Plumber

Tags