Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: February 21 to February 27, 2022

A weekly round-up of important legal developments in Karnataka.1: No Vicarious Liability ForCriminal Offences In Absence Of Statute: Karnataka HC Quashes Defamation CaseAgainst MP Rajeev Chandrashekhar Case Title: Rajeev Chandrasekhar v. K.Koteswar Rao Case No: Criminal Petition No.101127 Of 2015 Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 51 The Karnataka High Court has quashed the defamation proceedings against Member of Parliament, Rajeev Chandrashekhar, initiated in the year 2012, when he was the Managing Director of Suvarna News 24/7 Kannada Television Channel. A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna while allowing the quashing petition filed by Chandrashekhar said "The principle of vicarious liability is not applicable to criminal offences in the absence of any provision laid down in the statute. The Managing Director thus cannot be held to be vicariously liable for the acts committed by the Company or its employees merely because he happens to be the Managing Director of the TV news channel." 2: Properties Given As Dowry To BeIncluded In Partition Suit Instituted By Daughter Under Hindu Succession Act:Karnataka High Court Case Title: Hemalatha v. Venkatesh Case No: Writ Petition No.39982 Of 2018 Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 52 The Karnataka High Court has held that the properties which had been given as dowry or otherwise at the time of marriage of the daughter, would be amenable for partition and the same will have to be included in a suit for partition, instituted by the daughter. A single-judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj said, "In a suit for partition, the properties which had been given as dowry or otherwise at the time of marriage of the daughter plaintiff, claiming a right of partition under Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, would be amenable for partition and the same would have to be included in a suit for partition." Hijab Ban Reports 1. State Hasn't Banned Hijab, SaysKarnataka AG; If Institutions Permit, Will You Object? High Court Asks A Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court today continued hearing Advocate General Prabhuling Navadgi on behalf of the State, in the petitions filed by Muslim girl students, who have challenged the action of a government college in denying their entry for wearing a hijab (headscarf). Today is the 7th day of the hearing before the Full Bench. When the hearing started, the bench led by the Chief Justice sought a clarification from the State regarding its stand on banning hijab. This arose in view of the AG's submission that the Government Order dated February 5, which has been challenged in the writ petitions, does not prescribe any ban on hijab and that it is only an "innocuous" order which asks students to follow the uniforms prescribed by their institutions. 2: 'Govt Is Sensitive' : AdvocateGeneral Assures HC That Authorities Won't Act Beyond Interim Order In HijabCase The Advocate General of Karnataka on Monday assured the Karnataka High Court that there will be no violation by any government department of the February 10 order of the High Court, which had restrained students from wearing religious dresses in classrooms in institutions with prescribed uniforms. The AG's assurance came in response to a complaint that hijab ban was being enforced by authorities even in colleges without any dress code and policemen are deployed at the college gates to harass hijab-wearing Muslim women, including teachers. 3: Hijab Ban: Karnataka High CourtRefuses Interim Relief To Permit Degree College Students To Wear Headscarves The Karnataka High Court on Monday refused to grant any interim relief to two degree college students of Bhandarkar College of Arts and Science, Udupi, who sought directions to the college to permit them to attend classes wearing their headscarf(hijab). A single judge bench of Justice Krishan S Dixit refused interim relief while hearing a petition filed by two students of the Bhandarkar College of Arts and Science, Udupi. The bench observed that the interim order passed by the Full Bench on February 10 governs the issue at present and hence no other relief can be granted by a single bench, especially when hearing was progressing before the Full Bench. 4: Hijab Should Satisfy Tests OfConstitutional Morality & Individual Dignity As Held In Sabarimala Case :AG Tells Karnataka HC A Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court today continued hearing Advocate General Prabhuling Navadgi on behalf of the State, in the petitions filed by Muslim girl students, who have challenged the action of a government college in denying their entry for wearing a hijab (headscarf). Today is the 8th day of the hearing before the Full Bench. Navadgi told the Bench comprising Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice JM Khazi that petitioners have not shown that wearing hijab is an essential religious practice in Islam and thus, the protection under ...

Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: February 21 to February 27, 2022

Mustafa Plumber

Tags