Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 19 To June 25

Nominal IndexABC & Others And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 225Mali Rizwan And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 226Gururaj Havanur And The Management of Syndicate Bank & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 227Sindhu Boregowda And Yashwanth Bhaskar B P. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 228Vijesh Pillai And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 229The City Municipal Council And Akbar Patel. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 230Ramesh Naik. L v. State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 231Prajith R And XXX & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 232V V Singara Velu & ANR And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 233Lingasugur Taluk Halumata Abhivrudhi Samiti ( R ) & Others And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 234Subramani And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 235B S Kumar Swamy Versus State Of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 236Judgments/OrdersNon-Consummation Of Marriage Not Cruelty Under Section 498A IPC: Karnataka High Court Case Title: ABC & Others And State of Karnataka & ANRCase No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.7067 OF 2021Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 225The Karnataka High Court has quashed a criminal complaint filed by a wife against her husband under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, alleging that he did not have physical relations after marriage on account of watching spiritual videos and thus it amounted to cruelty.A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by the husband and his parents and quashed the proceedings registered against them by the wife 28 days after marriage. It said,“Neither the complaint nor the summary charge sheet narrates any factum/incident that would become an ingredient of Section 498A of the IPC. The only allegation is that he is a follower of Brahmakumari, always was watching videos of one sister Shivani, a Brahmakumari; gets inspired by watching those videos, always told that love is never getting physical, it should be soul to soul. On this score, he never intended to have a physical relationship with his wife. This would undoubtedly amount to cruelty due to non-consummation of marriage under Section 12(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act and not cruelty as is defined under Section 498A of the IPC.Externment Order Not Valid If Competent Authority Fails To Consider Objective Material Or Record Subjective Satisfaction: Karnataka High CourtCase Title: Mali Rizwan And State of Karnataka & OthersCase No: WRIT PETITION NO. 9709 OF 2023Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 226The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that consideration of objective material and subjective satisfaction of the competent authority is necessary before passing an order of externment.A single judge bench of Justice T G Shivashankare Gowda partly allowed the petition filed by one Mali Rizwan and quashed the order of Sub-divisional Magistrate, externing him from the limits of Kundapura to Sagara Sub-Division for 3 months. It said, “The objective material relied on is only the police report for subjective satisfaction. Non-compliance of Section 56 of the K.P. Act (Karnataka Police Act) is imminent. The impugned order lacks subjective satisfaction and test of reasonableness.”'Nature Of Duty' Relevant To Proportionality Of Sentence: Karnataka High Court Upholds Bank Manager's Dismissal For Misconduct Case Title: Gururaj Havanur And The Management of Syndicate Bank & ANRCase NO: WRIT PETITION NO. 109981 OF 2015Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 227The Karnataka High Court has upheld the dismissal order passed by the Management of Syndicate Bank against a former Manager accused of misconduct. A single judge bench Justice S Vishwajith Shetty sitting at Dharwad said, “While considering the question of proportionality of sentence imposed on a delinquent, the Court should also take into consideration the nature of duty performed by him and other relevant circumstances which go into the decision making process...If the delinquent was holding a responsible post and if he has breached the trust and acted with dishonesty he is required to be dealt with iron hands. If honesty and integrity are in built requirements for the post held by him, no lenient view can be taken against him.”Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Condition Requiring Wife To Sponsor Husband's Travel From USA For His Cross-Examination In Matrimonial Case Case Title: Sindhu Boregowda And Yashwanth Bhaskar B PCase No: WRIT PETITION NO.24827 OF 2022Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 228The Karnataka High Court has set aside an order passed by Family Court allowing application made by the wife to cross-examine her husband subject to a condition that she would bear his travel expense of Rs 1.65 lakhs, from the USA to Bangalore.A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit allowed the petition filed by Sindhu Boregowda and said “Putting a condition of the kind would virtually amount to foreclosing petitioner’s right to cross examine/further cross-examine the respondent that too in a serious matter in which her marriage is at stake. Courts of...

Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 19 To June 25

Mustafa Plumber

Tags