Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 16 - March 22, 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 107 - 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 117Nominal Citation Shri Mahesh v. State of Karnataka & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 107Directorate OF Enforcement v. ZO Pvt. Ltd, 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 108X v. Z, 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 109Shri V. Sivaprasad Reddy v. Smt Pillamma, 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 110Y v. State of Karnataka & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 111Income Tax Officer and CPIO v. Smt. Gulsanober Bano Zafar Ali Ansari and another, 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 112Smt. Sarbhanu Khatoon v. State of Karnataka., 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 113Chethan. S v. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation & Ors.., 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 114M/S. Reward360 Global Services Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Karnataka & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 115Smt. Laxmi Nagappa Kittur v. The Registrar General & Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 116U v. V, 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 117Judgments/ OrdersKarnataka High Court Flags Gaps In Tracing 'Missing' Persons, Orders Implementation Of SOP & District-Level Missing Persons UnitsCase Title: Shri Mahesh v. State of Karnataka & OrsCase No: WP No. 30006 OF 2024Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 107The Karnataka High Court has called for the State's records to verify the implementation of a Standard Operating Procedure devised earlier this year to deal with the larger systemic issues in tracing the missing persons.The single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindraj addressed the bigger picture of untraceable disappearances while hearing the specific grievance about a missing person's FIR marked 'dormant' in 2022 without progress:The court has now asked the State to submit a 'comprehensive compliance report' regarding the implementation of Standing Order 1054, which deals with a procedure to be followed on receipt of information about missing children/persons, by 10th April.Entire Funds In Account Can't Be Presumed 'Proceeds Of Crime': Karnataka High Court In WinZO CaseCase Title: Directorate OF Enforcement v. ZO Pvt. LtdCase No: Writ Appeal No. 492 Of 2026Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 108Allowing the WinZO group to make the payments to its employees from the company account frozen after money laundering allegations, the Karnataka High Court has held that the entire amount in the accounts of WinZO and its subsidiaries cannot be deemed as 'proceeds of crime'.“…Apex Court has clearly held that the proceeds of crime have to be linked to a predicate offence and it is only such property which is derived or obtained directly or indirectly as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence that can be regarded as 'proceeds of crime”, the Division Bench observed while referring to Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary's case.Live-In Relationship With Another Woman Not Bigamy: Karnataka High Court Quashes Wife's Case Against Septuagenarian HusbandCase Title: X v. ZCase No: Crl. P No 470/ 2019, Crl P. No. 7922 OF 2018 & Crl. P No. 6031 OF 2022Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 109The Karnataka High Court has recently quashed criminal proceedings against a 73-year-old husband, his alleged second wife, and his own children, holding that mere living in an 'illegal relationship' does not constitute marriage for the purpose of Section 494 IPC (marrying again during the lifetime of spouse).“…it was incumbent upon the complainant [wife] to plead and prove that accused No.1 had married accused No.4. Mere living in a relationship, does not amount to a marriage and therefore, an offence under Section 494 of IPC was not made out by the complainant…”, the bench sitting at Bengaluru also clarified that the trial court's order of taking cognisance against the accused was not legally sound.Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash Child Marriage Case Against Groom, Families; Warns Temples, Priests And Marriage Halls Of LiabilityCase Title: Y v. State of Karnataka & Ors.Case No: Crl. P No 470/ 2019, Crl P. No. 7922 OF 2018 & Crl. P No. 6031 OF 2022Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 110The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash a Child Marriage case against the groom as well as the families of the groom and the minor girl, by underscoring that ignorance of law or factum of a cordial marital relationship would not legalise the wrong already committed.“Parents who ought to bless their daughters with encouragement, education and empowerment, instead bless them with premature matrimony. If such conduct were to receive judicial indulgence, the eradication of child marriage would remain an illusive aspiration…”, the court strongly remarked.The single judge bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna also warned that the liability for facilitating child marriages wouldn't be confined to the respective families or relatives alone. Even the temple and the officiating priests of such a marriage could be brought under the sweep of law. Similarly, even a marriage hall and its management may face the rigours of law for conducting child marriages, the court explained.Not Every 'Contentious Probate Proceeding' Results In Decree; 'Substance Over Form' Determines Appeal: Karnataka High CourtCase Title: Shri V....

Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 16 - March 22, 2026

Sebin James

Tags