Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: November 20 To November 27, 2022

Nominal Index: [Citations 468 - 481] KAJAL NARESH KUMAR v. Union of India & others. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 468 K. B. NAIK v. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA & Others. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 469 A.N.MURTHY v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & Others. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 470 ASHVEEJA T.C v. ENDOWMENT COMMISSIONER & others. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 471 MR. M.M. KARIAPPA & ANR v. ADVANCE MAGAZINE PUBLISHERS, INC.. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 472 GIRISH S/O VINAYAK KMUTTATTI v. STATE OF KARNATAKA & Others. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 473 RAJATH R v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 474 NALINI DEVI v. THE GENERAL MANAGER CANARA BANK. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 475 K.S.RAMA RAO v. SUBBALAKSHMI. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 476 RAMANJI v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 477 SCANIA COMMERCIAL VEHICLES INDIA PVT. LTD & Others v. STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 478 SA RA GOVINDU & Others v. THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 479 KEMPAMANI D E v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & Others. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 480 SHREESHA SASITHOTA PRABHAKARAN v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA. 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 481 Judgments/Orders: Passport May Be Refused After Filing Of Closure Report By Police, Pending Acceptance By Magistrate: Karnataka HC Case Title: KAJAL NARESH KUMAR v. Union of India & others Case No:WRIT PETITION No.20850 OF 2022. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 468 The Karnataka High Court has said that mere filing of a B Report (Closure report) by the police before the jurisdictional court which is yet to be accepted would not mean that the accused is acquitted in the case, thus passport authorities would have the right to refuse to issue of passport or travel documents. A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna observed, "The rigour of Section 6(2)(f) of the (Passport) Act gets evaporated only when the applicant who is facing criminal proceedings or a FIR is acquitted, discharged or the proceeding against the said applicant is quashed by a competent Court of law, in exercise of its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. Mere filing of 'B' report would not mean that the petitioner becomes allegation free qua Section 6(2)(f) of the Act." God Himself Gave Opportunity Of Hearing To Adam & Eve Before Passing Sentence: Karnataka HC Quashes BCI's Order Suspending Ex-KSBC Head's Practice Case Title: K. B. NAIK v. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA & Others Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 20983 OF 2022 Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 469 Stressing upon the significance of following principles of natural justice by any authority in power, the Karnataka High Court recently referred to the legend of Adam and Eve. Justice M Nagaprasanna observed, "God himself gave an opportunity of hearing to Adam and Eve before passing the sentence for consumption of the forbidden fruit. The principle has emerged since then. Thus, it is not today that this concept exists; it is as early as humanity." The Judge added that the principle has since then been honed and refined through "judicial treatment" by Courts of law to render justice and ensure minimum protection of rights of an individual against any arbitrary procedure. [Minor Mineral Rules] State Has Revisional Jurisdiction Over Demand Notice Issued By Non-Designated Officer With Controlling Authority's Approval: Karnataka HC Case Title: A.N.MURTHY v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & Others Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.22038 OF 2022 Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 470 The Karnataka High Court has clarified that appeals filed before the State Government, challenging demand notices issued by the Deputy Director, Department of Mining and Geology which are approved by the Director, who is the Controlling Authority, are maintainable. A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Ashok S Kinagi said, "The petitioner has not committed any error in submitting the revision petition, being aggrieved by the issuance of demand notices by the Deputy Director on an approval by the Director, to the State Government for its consideration." Blatant Violation Of Natural Justice: Karnataka HC Permits Dismissed Archak At Bhoga Nandishwara Temple To Perform Duties Until Enquiry Is CompletedCase Title: ASHVEEJA T.C v. ENDOWMENT COMMISSIONER & others Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 20999 OF 2022 Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 471 The Karnataka High Court has quashed the order passed by the Endowment Commissioner, dismissing an Archak of the Bhoga Nandishwara Temple in Chikkaballapur Taluk, without holding an inquiry on charges of alleged misconduct. A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna directed the respondent-authority to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and complete the enquiry within two weeks, as was directed by the High Court in an earlier round of litigation (against petitioner's suspension). Till then, it permitted the petitioner to perform as Archak in the temple. ...

Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: November 20 To November 27, 2022

Mustafa Plumber

Tags