Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 13 To March 19, 2023

Nominal IndexABC Vs XYZ. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 104ABC Vs XYZ. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 105ABC And State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 106Jayamma & Others And State of Karnataka & others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 107Lakshminarayana And Lokesh L. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 108Sameer Dinakar Bhole And State of Karnataka & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 109Khaleel Ul Rehman & Others And Sharaffunnisa Muniri @ Ashraf Unnisa. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 110Judgments/OrdersKarnataka High Court Refuses To Repatriate Minor To Germany, Says No Habeas Corpus Jurisdiction In Face Of Interim Order Giving Custody To Mother Case Title: ABC Vs XYZCase No: W.P.H.C. NO.46 OF 2022Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 104The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a habeas corpus petition filed by a man seeking direction to his wife to produce their minor son before the court and then direct his repatriation to Germany.A division bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Vijaykumar A Patil dismissed the petition filed by the father, it said, “The interim custody of the son has been granted to the wife by an interim order dated 08.06.2017 passed by the family court. The aforesaid interim order is still in force. Therefore, in violation of the aforesaid interim order, which binds the parties, this court in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction would not direct repatriation of the son to Germany.”Indian Divorce Act | Karnataka High Court Declares Marriage As Void Saying Woman Misrepresented And Concealed Her Real Age From Husband Case Title: ABC Vs XYZCase No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5183 OF 2016Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 105The Karnataka High Court has declared a Christian couple's marriage as null and void holding that the woman had misrepresented and concealed her real age at the time of marriage.A division bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Vijaykumar Patil allowed the petition filed by the husband questioning the order of the family court rejecting his petition filed under Section 18 of the Indian Divorce Act. The family court had held that petitioner (husband) failed to prove the grounds to declare his marriage with the respondent as null and void.Juvenile Directed To Be Tried As Adult Can Seek Bail From Children's Court U/S 12 JJ Act, Need Not Resort To CrPC: Karnataka High Court Case Title: ABC And State of KarnatakaCase No: CRL.R.P. NO. 1372 OF 2022Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 106The Karnataka High Court has made it clear that once an order is passed under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, holding that a child in conflict with law is required to be tried for heinous offences as an adult, the JJ Board has no jurisdiction to consider the bail application pending before it.A single judge bench of Justice S Vishwajith Shetty added, "As against the said order, the juvenile has an option to file an appeal before the Sessions Court under Section 101(2) of the Act or he may also choose to file an application under Section 12 of the Act before the Children's Court to which his case is transferred."'Reflects Mindset Of East India Company Era': Karnataka High Court Pulls Up BDA For Denying TDR Certificates To Landowners Case Title: Jayamma & Others And State of Karnataka & othersCase No: WRIT PETITION NO. 20671 OF 2022Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 107The Karnataka High Court has while quashing an order passed by the Bangalore Development Authority denying TDR Certificates (Transfer of Development Rights) as promised to land owners while acquiring their lands for public purpose, observed, “A bare perusal of the impugned order gives an impression that it is texted with the mindset of a Draftsman of East India Company of the bygone era and not by the one whose heart is at the right place.”A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit allowed the petitions filed by Jayamma and Others and quashed the order dated 17.03.2022 issued by the Respondent - BDA whereby, the recommendation of the respondent —BBMP for issuing the TDR Certificates to them has been negatived.NI Act | Hardship To Accused No Ground To Not Release Interim Compensation In Favour Of Complainants: Karnataka High Court Case Title: Lakshminarayana And Lokesh LCase NO: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1189 OF 2023 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1151 OF 2023 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1153 OF 2023 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1158 OF 2023 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1311 OF 2023 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1346 OF 2023 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1350 OF 2023 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1355 OF 2023 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1356 OF 2023.Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 108The Karnataka High Court has quashed an order passed by the appellate court refusing to release interim compensation deposited by the accused convicted under Negotiable Instruments Act in favour of complainants.A single judge bench of Justice K Natarajan allowed a batch of petitions and directed that 20% of the amount in deposit be released to the petitioners - complainants with due identification, with a condition that they shall refund the amount within 60 days from...

Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: March 13 To March 19, 2023

Mustafa Plumber

Tags