LiveLaw Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 8 - June 14, 2026

Citations: 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 199 to 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 205Nominal IndexJagrutha Karnataka, Jagrutha Bharatha v. State of Karnataka & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 199Girish M Anchan & Ors. v. State of Karnataka, 2026 LiveLaw(Kar) 200Padmavathi T B v. State of Karnataka,2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 201PSBB Learning Leadership Academy v. Mrs. Barnali Rout & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 202Sri P.A. Ponnappa v. State of Karnataka & Ors, 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 203Smt. S. Savithramma v. The Karnataka Information Commission & Ors, 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 204Sharada Purya Naik vs. State of Karnataka & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 205Judgments/ Orders'Whimsical Matters' Karnataka High Court Rejects PIL For Enquiry Into Delay In Probe Over Mahatma Gandhi's Assassination, Imposes ₹10K CostCase Title: Jagrutha Karnataka, Jagrutha Bharatha v. State of Karnataka & Ors.Case No: WP 12170/2026Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 199The Karnataka High Court on Monday (June 8) dismissed a PIL seeking directions to Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi, Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla and others regarding an allegedly "missing volume" of Mahatma Gandhi's autobiography and "17-year-old delayed probe" into his assassination in 1948.The Division Bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice K.S Hemalekha orally remarked that "There is no national interest or public interest..Judicial time cannot be used for whimsical matters”, while dismissing the plea by 'Jagrutha Karnataka, Jagrutha Bharatha' with Rs 10,000/- cost, payable to the Legal Services Authority.“…. As noted above, the petitioner earlier filed a similar petition…which was dismissed on 28 August 2025. We find that the present petition is an exercise in procuring publicity rather than seeking a relief in public interest. Therefore, we are not persuaded to entertain the same….”, the court accordingly noted in the order.'No Evidence': Karnataka High Court Quashes FIR Against BJP MLA Yashpal Suvarna, Others Accused Of Burning Ex-CM's Effigy During ProtestCase Title: Girish M Anchan & Ors. v. State of KarnatakaCase No: Crl P. 635/2025Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 200The Karnataka High Court on Monday (June 8) quashed an FIR against BJP MLA Yashpal Suvarna and others booked in connection with an alleged illegal protest and burning of an effigy of former Chief Minister Siddaramaiah in Manipal in 2024, holding that there was no direct evidence linking the petitioners to the incident.According to the complaint it has been alleged that last year, the petitioners had allegedly organized an illegal protest at Syndicate Circle in Manipal against the withholding of a state award to the principal of a Kundapura school. During the protest, volunteers allegedly burned an effigy of former Chief Minister Siddaramaiah.The single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the plea for quashing FIR, observing that permitting further investigation 'without an iota of evidence' would constitute an 'abuse of the process of law'.“…Without an iota of evidence, further investigation to be permitted will be an abuse of process of law. It is apposite to refer to State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal and others. In that light, Allowed. Quashed…, the court accordingly noted in the order.Karnataka High Court Fines Woman Cop ₹1 Lakh For Suppressing Order Directing FIR For Allegedly Kicking Lady Advocate To Seek Stay On ProbeCase Title: Padmavathi T B v. State of KarnatakaCase No: CRL.P 7311/2026Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 201The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday (June 9) imposed cost of Rs. 1 Lakh on a female cop for suppressing the existence of an earlier order directing registration of an FIR against her for allegedly "kicking" a lady advocate, when she had approached the vacation bench recently in order to seek a stay of probe.The court said that the petitioner had not disclosed the earlier order directing FIR against her before the coordinate vacation bench, which had passed an interim order staying probe in the FIR.The single judge bench of Justice M.Nagaprasanna while dismissing the petitioner's plea for quashing the FIR, in his order noted:“…. The petitioner [SI] comes to the Police Station and boots the complainant [lady lawyer accused of unruly conduct in another case] …. all of this is captured in CCTV and this court's order in Crl P. 3695/2026. Pursuant to the registration of crime, apart from departmental enquiry, criminal proceedings are initiated against the police officer. A separate Crl P 7311/2026 comes to be filed by the police officer and an interim order of stay on further investigation is granted by the coordinate [vacation] bench of this court…Not a whisper about the order passed by this court pursuant to which the crime is registered is made in the pleadings before the coordinate bench. Suppressing the very foundation of registration of the crime, petitioners approach the coordinate[vacation] bench and an order is passed by this court. Therefore, this petition deserves to be dismissed…. but an exemplary cost of Rs 1 lakh should be...

LiveLaw Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 8 - June 14, 2026

Sebin James

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sebin James

LiveLaw Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 8 - June 14, 2026

Sebin James

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sebin James

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers