Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up [December 4 To December 10, 2023]

Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 458 To 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 468

Nominal Index:

Sanju v. The State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 458

C G Jagdish AND State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 459

Santhosh Beejadi Srinivas AND Union of India & Another. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 460

Srishti Daiv & ANR AND NIL. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 461

Hangal Taluka Civil Contractors Association AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 462

Ann Nimmi Sebastian v. State of Karnataka and Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 463

Chikkagundappa And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 464

Renuka Yamunappa Golasangi v. Mohan Naik. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 465

Dr Jonathan Jaideep AND State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 466

Syed Esa Ibrahim & ANR AND State By Channapatna East PS. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 467

Avenue Supermarts LTD AND Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 468

Judgments/Orders

Karnataka High Court Upholds Convict's Life Sentence For Murdering Man Having Illicit Relationship With His Wife

Case Title: Sanju v. The State of Karnataka,

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100297/2019

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 458

The Karnataka High Court has upheld the conviction for murder and sentence of life imprisonment of a man, who ran over his neighbor (Jyothiba) for involvement in an illicit relationship with his wife.

A division bench of Justice HP Sandesh and Justice Ramachandra D Huddar dismissed the appellant's plea, noting that the chain of events clearly pointed to the guilt of the appellant, who fled from the spot rather than taking the victims (Jyothiba and his father) to a hospital.

“When the accident occurred, he being the neighbour, if he had not indulged in an act of committing the murder and it was merely an accident, he ought not to have fled away from the place of accident. An ordinary prudent man, when there was an accident, he would have helped to shift injured persons to the hospital, since he is acquainted with victims 1 and 2 being his neighbours. But he has not done so. This conduct has to be taken note of.”

Karnataka Land Revenue Act | Deputy Commissioner Cannot Invoke Inherent Powers To 'Casually Rescind' 25 Yr Old Conversion Order: High Court

Case Title: C G Jagdish AND State of Karnataka

Case No: Writ Appeal No. 387 of 2023.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 459

The Karnataka High Court has held that inherent power vested under Section 25 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 with the Deputy Commissioner cannot be invoked casually to rescind orders of conversion of land.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed an appeal filed by C G Jagdish and said “The inherent power vested in a Revenue Court by virtue of Section 25 of the 1964 Act could not have been invoked, even if we agree that the order of conversion was statutorily appealable. A resort to inherent power is not like a drug of choice for a physician.”

Karnataka High Court Rejects Plea For Passport Renewal By Man Accused In Mother's Death, Says Short-Validity Passport Application May Be Considered

Case Title: Santhosh Beejadi Srinivas AND Union of India & Another

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.24269 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 460

The Karnataka High Court has upheld a decision of the passport authority rejecting the issuance of a regular passport (Valid for 10 years), to an accused charged with offences of murder and criminal conspiracy in the death of his mother.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna while deciding the petition said “the prayer for issuance of a regular passport/normal validity passport for 10 years is rejected. The impugned acknowledgement rejecting issuance of regular passport stands sustained.”

Hindu Marriage Act | Trial Court Must Wait 18 Months Before Dismissing Plea U/S 13B Even If Parties Trying To Reunite: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Srishti Daiv & ANR AND NIL

Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7146/2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 461

The Karnataka High Court has held that under Section 13B (2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, a couple seeking divorce had 18 months to report a settlement between them after filing the petition for divorce by mutual consent.

It further clarified that the trial court cannot on its own dismiss the petition without the request of the parties for such disposal. A division bench of Justice K S Mudagal and Justice K V Arvind allowed an appeal and set aside the order of the trial court dismissing the petition, and directed the parties to appear before the Bengaluru Mediation Centre.

No Fundamental Right To Do Business With State: High Court Dismisses Contractors' Plea Against Karnataka Govt's Call For Tenders Above ₹1 Crore

Case Title: Hangal Taluka Civil Contractors Association AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 104062 OF 2022 (GM-TEN) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 103437 OF 2022 WRIT PETITION NO. 103745 OF 2022 WRIT PETITION NO. 103755 OF 2022 WRIT PETITION NO. 104013 OF 2022.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 462

The Karnataka High Court has refused to interfere with the government's decision to issue tenders under the Amrutha Nagarothana Scheme, wherein various works are clubbed together and the value of each tender was allotted to be more than Rs.1 crore.

A single-judge bench of Justice M I Arun dismissed a batch of petitions filed by the Hangal Taluka Civil Contractors Association and Others.

It said “the State Government taking into consideration the works required is always at liberty to prescribe qualification of tenderers to ensure that contractors have the capacity and resources to successfully execute the work. No person can claim a fundamental right to carry on business with the Government.”

One Investor Cannot Accuse Another Investor Of Cheating If Business Runs Into Losses: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Ann Nimmi Sebastian v. State of Karnataka and Anr.

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9212 OF 2021 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4676 OF 2022

Citation No. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 463

The Karnataka High Court has held that an investor of a company cannot file case for cheating against another investor if he loses his money because the company suffered business losses.

A Single Judge Bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna made the observation, while allowing the plea of petitioners who were charged for offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 406, 403, 418 read with Section 34 of IPC. As per the allegations, the complainant paid Rs.1.29 crores to petitioner-Thomas Sebastian for commencement of a company, however, the company never took off.

Karnataka High Court Calls For Explanation From Trial Court Judge Who Failed To Comply With HC Directions To Conclude Trial By January 2023

Case Title: Chikkagundappa And State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.7657 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 464

The Karnataka High Court recently called for an explanation from the Trial Court for not obeying its direction of disposing of a criminal case registered against a man charged with the death of his wife, under Section 498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

A single judge bench of Justice V Srishananda had earlier called for an explanation for the delay in concluding the proceedings while hearing a successive bail application filed by the accused. Notably, although the Trial Court had been directed to dispose of the case within 31st January 2023, it was contended that the Trial itself had not commenced.

Karnataka High Court Dismisses Transfer Plea Of Woman Accused Under Section 138 of NI Act

Case Title: Renuka Yamunappa Golasangi v. Mohan Naik

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200690 OF 2023 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200697 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 465

The Karnataka High Court has rejected the plea of a senior citizen woman, accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act ("NI Act"), seeking transfer of case from one court to another.

A Single Judge Bench of Justice K Natarajan passed the order in a petition of accused-Renuka Yamunappa Golasangi, who sought transfer of her case from Sagara to Vijayapura.

The issue had arisen when the respondent filed complaints under Section 200 CrPC against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of NI Act. When this complaint was pending before Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Sagara, the petitioner moved an application for transfer.

Karnataka High Court Quashes Arms Act Case Against Man Flying From Mysuru To Chennai With Live Bullets In Carry-On Luggage

Case Title: Dr Jonathan Jaideep AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 14289 OF 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 466

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a case registered under the Arms Act against a man who was flying from Mysuru to Chennai, with seven live bullets in his luggage, without any weapon.

A single-judge bench of Justice Hemant Chandangoudar allowed the petition filed by Dr Jonathan Jaideep and quashed the case registered against him under Section 25(1-B)(a) of the Arms Act.

It was alleged that on 26.12.2021, Indigo Airlines staff at Mysore Airport filed a complaint stating that at the time of checking the baggage of the petitioner, who was flying from Mysuru to Chennai, it was discovered by the airline officials that the shaving kit contained seven live bullets which were being carried without any weapon.

Karnataka HC Quashes Case Against Persons Charged With Threatening, Abusing Police Officials When Questioned On Keeping Hotel Open After 11:30 PM

Case Title: Syed Esa Ibrahim & ANR AND State By Channapatna East PS

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No. 10483 OF 2022

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 467

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a criminal case registered against two persons who allegedly abused police personnel with unparliamentary words, threatened them with dire consequences and restrained them from discharging their official duties when questioned for running their hotel business beyond 11.30 pm.

A single judge bench of Justice Hemant Chandangoudar allowed the petition filed by Syed Esa Ibrahim and Syed Mujahid Mehdi and quashed the case pending against them for offences under sections 341, 353, 506 and 114 r/w Section 34 of IPC.

High Court Directs Karnataka Chief Secretary To Constitute High-Level Committee For Constant Monitoring Of Storm Water Drains In Bangalore

Case Title: Avenue Supermarts LTD AND Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 3728 OF 2022 (LB-BMP) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 21441 OF 2022(LB-BMP) WRIT PETITION NO. 20383 OF 2023.

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 468

The Karnataka High Court has directed the Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka to constitute a Committee comprising of officers such as the Chief Commissioner of the BBMP along with other Stakeholders like the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Principal Secretary, Gram Panchayat, for constant monitoring of storm water drains, more particularly in the rainy season, them from being blocked.

A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj said “This aspect being a perennial problem, it would be required that proper monitoring system of the drains constructed by the BBMP is maintained. In the event of any fresh storm water drains required to be constructed depending on the hydrological survey conducted by the BBMP, the BBMP through the state would always have the option to acquire the said land and form such storm water drains for the benefit of the citizens of Bangalore."