Karnataka High Court Weekly Roundup: May 26 - June 01, 2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 185 to 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 193Nominal Index:Anumandala Rajesh Reddy AND State of Karnataka. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 185B R Anand AND V R Gisha. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 186Somarapu Vamashi AND State of Karnataka. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 187Girish Bharadwaj AND State of Karnataka. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 188Ramesh Naik L AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 189Vidya M V AND Bhavana S. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 190Rait Sena Karnataka AND Union of India & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 191Naveen Kumar N & Others AND M/S Karnataka Power Corporation Limited & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 192Shashank J Rai AND National Anti Doping Agency-India & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 193Judgements/OrdersMere Use Of Abusive Language Not By Itself Intentional Insult U/S 504 IPC: Karnataka High CourtCase Title: Anumandala Rajesh Reddy AND State of KarnatakaCase No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8897 OF 2023Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 185The Karnataka High Court recently quashed a case registered by the police against an accused who while being apprehended for his involvement in another case allegedly abused the police in filthy language and tried to assault them and thereby obstructed them from discharging their duties.A single judge, Justice Mohammad Nawaz allowing the petition filed by Anumandala Rajesh Reddy quashed the proceedings initiated against him under Sections 353 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 504 pertains to Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace.It said, “It is not stated in the complaint the nature of abusive language used by the accused. The allegations are vague in nature. Further, mere use of abusive language would not by itself attract the ingredients of Section 504 IPC.”Limitation Period For Issuing Notice To Drawer Excludes Day On Which Bank Informs Holder Of Cheque Dishonour: Karnataka High CourtCase Title: B R Anand AND V R GishaCase No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.567 OF 2019Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 186The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that the day on which a bank intimates to the holder of cheque of its dishonour has to be excluded and the same cannot be taken into consideration while calculating the period of limitation for issuing notice for payment to the drawer under Negotiable Instruments Act.Section 138(b) is an important condition for the application of offence of cheque dishonour. It states:"Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply...unless the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque, as the case may be, makes a demand for the payment of the said amount of money by giving a notice in writing, to the drawer of the cheque, [within thirty days of the receipt of information by him from the bank regarding the return of the cheque as unpaid...".Karnataka High Court Quashes FIR Against 22-Year-Old Accused Of Reselling IPL Match Tickets At Higher PriceCase Title: Somarapu Vamashi AND State of KarnatakaCase No: Criminal Petition No 7476/2025Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 187The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday (May 27) quashed an FIR registered against a 22-year-old, accused of re-selling tickets purchased by him for the Indian Premier League (IPL) match at a higher price.A vacation judge, Justice Suraj Govindaraj allowed the petition filed by Somarapu Vamashi who was charged for offence under Section 318 (4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).The petitioner was booked by the Bellandur police station on the charge that he had brought certain tickets for the IPL match to be played between Royal Challengers Bangalore and Kolkata Knight Riders at the Chinnaswamy Stadium in Bengaluru. It was alleged that ten tickets priced at Rs 1,200 each were sold by him at Rs 6,000 each to certain persons.Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Govt Order Directing Withdrawal Of 43 Criminal Cases Against 'Highly Influential Persons'Case title: Girish Bharadwaj AND State of KarnatakaCase No: WP 3817/2025Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 188The Karnataka High Court on Thursday set aside the Government order, directing public prosecutors to withdraw 43 criminal cases registered/pending against persons accused of various offences including rioting, attempt to murder, stated to include highly influential persons including politicians, in breach of Section 321 of Criminal Procedure Code.A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind while pronouncing its order said “Petition is allowed Government Order, dated 15-10-2024, is hereby set aside, it is declared that the order shall stand non-est since inception, consequences in law will follow.” The detailed order will be made available in due course.The order was passed while allowing the public interest litigation filed by Girish Bharadwaj questioning a government order.Access To Clean Water Part Of Article 21: Karnataka High Court Directs State To Frame SOP For Maintenance Of Drinking Water FacilitiesCase Title: Ramesh Naik L AND State of Karnataka & OthersCase No: WP 9911/2024Citation No:...

Karnataka High Court Weekly Roundup: May 26 - June 01, 2025

Mustafa Plumber

Tags