Karnataka High Court Weekly Round Up: May 25 - May 31, 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 190- 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 194Nominal CitationsCristian Soporuchukwu v. State of Karnataka ,2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 190Mahesh Shetty Thimarody v. State of Karnataka , 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 191Sri Manjunatha N. v. State of Karnataka & Another, 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 192Sri Pradeepkumar v. State by Vidhana Soudha Police Station & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw(Kar) 193Mr. Nixon v. State by Banaswadi Police Station & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 194Judgments/ OrdersViolation Of Arrest Safeguards Can't Be Used As “Backdoor Entry” For Bail In Commercial NDPS Cases: Karnataka High CourtCase Title: Cristian Soporuchukwu v. State of KarnatakaCase No.: Criminal Petition No.16286/2025Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 190The Karnataka High Court has recently dismissed the bail plea preferred by a Nigerian national for possessing commercial quantity of MDMA crystals, reasoning that the non-furnishing of grounds of arrest could not be utilised as 'a backdoor entry' to avail bail by superseding the twin conditions for bail laid down in Section 37 of the NDPS Act.The vacation bench of Justice V Srishananda observed in the order that non-compliance with furnishing the grounds of arrest as derived from Article 22(1) of the Constitution would entitle the accused to bail in ordinary offences; the same principle cannot be applied mechanically when the seized narcotics are commercial in quantity.“…While on one hand, non-furnishing of grounds of arrest, or improper compliance of furnishing the grounds of arrest would be a good ground for grant of bail in all offences, on the other hand, where the accused is alleged of possessing commercial quantity of NDPS, would not be permitted to gain a back door entry in getting the bail on the ground of improper compliance of furnishing of grounds of arrest, especially when he has failed to make out a ground for grant of bail by resorting to Section 37 of the NDPS Act." the Court noted in its order dated May 7.Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To Activist Accused Of Outraging Modesty Of Woman By Linking Her To Veerendra HeggadeCase Title: Mahesh Shetty Thimarody v. State of Karnataka Case No: Criminal Petition No. 7376 of 2026Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 191The Karnataka High Court granted anticipatory bail to social activitist Mahesh Shetty Thimarody accused of making allegedly derogatory remarks about a woman and implying that she had an illicit relationship with Rajya Sabha MP Veerendra Heggade, administrator (Dharma Adhikari) of Dharmasthala Temple. The single judge bench of Justice R. Nataraj opined that custodial interrogation was unnecessary since the crux of the case at hand relies on a purported telephonic conversation between the accused and one Mr. Prajwal.The said call recording was allegedly later forwarded to the complainant woman's son by Prajwal himself. The son, disturbed by the insinuations allegedly made by Shetty on the call recording, informed his mother about the same. The complainant had alleged that the petitioner had thereby linked her to Veerendra Hegde and his brothers. She claimed that this outraged her modesty and generated enmity between groups.Karnataka High Court Declines Anticipatory Bail To Movie Theatre Owner Accused Of Stalking, Sexually Harassing Minor StudentCase Title: Sri Manjunatha N. v. State of Karnataka & AnotherCase No.: Criminal Petition No. 7025 of 2026Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 192The Karnataka High Court refused to grant anticipatory bail to a 52-year-old cinema theatre owner accused of stalking and sexually harassing a class 9 minor student.The complainant alleged that the accused, who owns Shankar Talkies, made explicit threats over the phone that she and her friends should sleep with him; otherwise, he would stab her.The single judge bench of Justice R Nataraj dismissed the petition filed by Manjunatha N, who has been charged by the Ramanagara Town Police for a slew of offences including those under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.The Court noted in the order that the minor victim had previously complained about inappropriate touching and stalking by the theatre owner. Subsequent to the said complaint, the petitioner-accused allegedly escalated the harassment meted out to the student by sending a group of boys to threaten her with murder and acid attack.'Disturbing Trend Of Dragging Advocates': Karnataka HC Quashes FIR Against Accused's Lawyer Who Filed RTI Seeking Info On Complainant Case Title: Sri Pradeepkumar v. State by Vidhana Soudha Police Station & Anr.Case Number: Writ Petition No. 29541 of 2024 (GM-RES)Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 193Cautioning against 'increasingly disturbing trend' of dragging lawyers into criminal proceedings, Karnataka High Court quashed an FIR against a lawyer booked for forgery and offences under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, who had appeared for the co-accused in a matrimonial case and...

Karnataka High Court Weekly Round Up: May 25 - May 31, 2026

Sebin James

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Karnataka High Court Weekly Round Up: May 25 - May 31, 2026

Sebin James

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers