Nominal Index [Citation 164 - 169]:Chandrashekhar AND State of Karnataka. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 164High Court Of Karnataka AND The Union of India & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 165Mohamed Ikbal AND Secretary to Government of Karnataka. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 166CV Rajanna & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 167ABC AND Union of India & Others. 2025 LiveLaw...
Nominal Index [Citation 164 - 169]:
Chandrashekhar AND State of Karnataka. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 164
High Court Of Karnataka AND The Union of India & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 165
Mohamed Ikbal AND Secretary to Government of Karnataka. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 166
CV Rajanna & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 167
ABC AND Union of India & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 168
Raviraja Rai M And State of Karnataka. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 169
Judgments/Orders
Case Title: Chandrashekhar AND State of Karnataka
Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.11138 OF 2024
Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 164
The Karnataka High Court has quashed a case registered against a 67-year-old man living in Jayanagar area of Bengaluru who was accused of cultivating 5 to 6 cannabis plants in the backyard of his property.
A single judge, Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by Chandrashekar, and quashed the case registered against him under Sections 20(a) and 20(b)(ii)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
The court said “The prosecution has not placed an iota of evidence to demonstrate that the petitioner was cultivating ganja and the quantity of ganja found from the backyard of the petitioner was admittedly weighed along with the entire plants that were uprooted without segregation.”
Case Title: High Court Of Karnataka AND The Union of India & Others
Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 16219 OF 2024
Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 165
The Karnataka High Court has directed Central and State forest authorities to commit themselves to conserve and preserve the "animal-asset" elephant, by taking steps to minimize, avoid and obliterate the risk of elephants succumbing to death by electrocution.
A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice M I Arun directed thus while disposing of a suo-motu petition initiated last year, based on a newspaper report pointing to the repeated incidents of elephant deaths due to electrocution or other unnatural reasons.
Case Title: Mohamed Ikbal AND Secretary to Government of Karnataka
Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.23615 OF 2022
Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 166
The Karnataka High Court has said that parties-in-person who are not able to plead properly in their petition and draft their pleadings should not be granted the certification by the Registry to argue in the court in-person.
A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind observed thus while dismissing a petition filed by one Mohamed Ikbal.
The petitioner-party-in-person is an advocate, claimed to be a social worker and administrator of Masjid and Khabrastan at Rudrapatna, Arkalgud Taluka, Hassan District. He had approached the court seeking a direction to the authorities to undertake proper survey of a land which he claimed to be Muslim burial ground.
Case Title: CV Rajanna & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others
Case No: WRIT PETITION No.28822 OF 2024
Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 167
The Karnataka High Court has directed the State Government to grant cash awards to physically challenged athletes who participated and won medals at the 7th World Dwarf Games conducted in August 2017.
Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by C V Rajanna and others and directed, “Respondents to grant cash awards to the petitioners as claimed by them in terms of Government Order dated 30-11-2013. This order shall be complied within a period of eight weeks.”
Case Title: ABC AND Union of India & Others
Case No: WP 13182/2025
Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 168
The Karnataka High Court on Thursday (May 8) dismissed a petition filed by three minor children who are Pakistani Nationals, seeking to restrain the authorities from taking any coercive action against them until May 15, the date by which they are expected to leave India.
A vacation bench of Justice M G Uma said “The Undersecretary to Government of India passed the order dated 25-04-2025 regarding revocation of visa of Pakistani National. Therefore the Union of India, through the Cabinet Committee on Security has taken a conscious decision to safeguard interest of citizens in India. In such circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere with the same, to pass a favourable order in favour of the petitioners. Hence petition stands dismissed.”
Case Title: Raviraja Rai M And State of Karnataka
Case No: WP 2579/2014
Citation No 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 169
The Karnataka High Court has held that under the State Forest Act there is a presumption that a forest produce belongs to a State government and the burden on rebutting the presumption lies on the accused booked for offences under the Act such as illegally transporting such produce.
For context, Section 80 (Presumption that forest produce belongs to Government) when in any proceedings taken under this Act or in consequence of anything done under this Act or under any other law for the time being in force, a question arises as to whether any forest produce is the property of the State Government, such produce shall be presumed to be the property of the State Government until the contrary is proved, and in case of any prosecution the burden of proving the contrary shall lie on the accused.
Justice Suraj Govindaraj held thus while dismissing a petition filed by one Raviraja Rai M who had challenged the order of the session court upholding order of the authorities confiscating his pick up vehicle which was used for transporting wooden logs without permit.