Karnataka High Court Weekly Roundup: March 14 To March 20, 2022

Nominal Index: Mahantesh v. Netharavati, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 74 Resham v. State of Karnataka and Others with connected cases, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 75 Snapdeal Pvt. Ltd V State Of Karnataka, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 76 Narendra Prasad P. V N. Sujatha, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 77 Sunil Chajed v State of Karnataka, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 78 Navodaya Medical College V. The State Of Karnataka, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 79 Kasturi Rajupeta V. Union Of India, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 80 Judgement/Order/Reports 1: Insurance Company Not Liable To Pay Compensation If Heavy Goods Vehicle Is Driven By Person Holding Light Motor Vehicle License:Karnataka High Court Case Title: Mahantesh v. Netharavati Case No: M.F.A. No.100096/2019 (MV) Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 74The Karnataka High Court has said that the insurance company will not be liable to pay compensation, if a heavy goods vehicle is driven by a person holding a light motor vehicle license. A single judge bench of Justice S Vishwajit Shetty while partly allowing an appeal filed by one Mahantesh, owner of a tipper lorry said, "The vehicle in question which is categorised as a heavy goods vehicle comes within the meaning of Section 2(16) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 as the gross vehicle weight undisputedly exceeds 12000 kg. Under the circumstances, the Tribunal was fully justified in holding that the offending vehicle was used in violation of the terms and conditions of the policy and therefore the insurer of the offending vehicle was not liable to pay the compensation." 2: 'Hijab Not Essential Religious Practice In Islam':Karnataka High Court Dismisses Muslim Girls' Petitions Against Hijab Ban In Classrooms Case Title: Resham v. State of Karnataka and Others with connected cases Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 75 Wearing of hijab is not a part of Essential Religious Practice in Islamic faith and thus, is not protected under Article 25 of the Constitution, the Karnataka High Court has held today. A Full Bench of the High Court further held that prescription of school uniform by the State is a reasonable restriction the students' rights under Article 25 and thus, the Government Order issued by the Karnataka government dated February 5 is not violative of their rights. 3: Karnataka Education Act Empowers Government To Prescribe Uniform: Karnataka High Court In Hijab Case Case Title: Resham v. State of Karnataka and Others with connected cases Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 75 The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday upheld the validity of the Government order dated February 5, providing for prescription of dress code in educational institutions. A full bench of Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishan S Dixit and Justice J M Khazi said, "Section 133(2) of the (Education) Act which is broadly worded empowers the government to issue any directions to give effect to the purposes of the Act or to any provision of the Act or to any Rule made thereunder." 4: Hijab Ban | Prescription Of Uniform Dress Code For All Students Serves 'Constitutional Secularism': Karnataka High Court Case Title: Resham v. State of Karnataka and Others with connected cases Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 75 The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday, while upholding the ban on wearing hijab in government colleges, observed that prescription of a uniform for all students will promote a sense of "constitutional secularism" within the institution. "The school regulations prescribing dress code for all the students as one homogenous class, serve constitutional secularism", the Court observed. 5: Holy Quran Does Not Mandate Wearing Of Hijab; Islam Does Not Cease To Exist If Hijab Is Not Followed : Karnataka High Court Case Title: Resham v. State of Karnataka and Others with connected cases Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 75 The Karnataka High Court, while declaring that the wearing of hijab by Muslim women is not an 'essential religious practice' in Islamic Faith, said that, "The Holy Quran does not mandate wearing of hijab or headgear for Muslim women". The Court also observed that the prescriptions in suras regarding Hijab are not mandatory. "The Holy Quran does not mandate wearing of hijab or headgear for Muslim women. Whatever is stated in the above sūras, we say, is only directory , because of absence of prescription of penalty or penance for not wearing hijab, the linguistic structure of verses supports this view", the Court observed. 6: Hijab Ban| Insistence On Wearing Purdah, Veil Or Headgear In Any Community May Hinder Emancipation Of Women : Karnataka High Court Case Title: Resham v. State of Karnataka and Others with connected cases Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 75 The Karnataka High Court, while upholding the ban on wearing hijab in educational institutions, has said that the insistence on wearing of purdah, veil, or headgear in any community may hinder hinder the process of emancipation of woman in general and ...

Karnataka High Court Weekly Roundup: March 14 To March 20, 2022

Mustafa Plumber

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Karnataka High Court Weekly Roundup: March 14 To March 20, 2022

Mustafa Plumber

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers