Karnataka High Court Weekly Roundup: May 26 - June 01, 2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 185 to 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 193

Nominal Index:

Anumandala Rajesh Reddy AND State of Karnataka. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 185

B R Anand AND V R Gisha. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 186

Somarapu Vamashi AND State of Karnataka. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 187

Girish Bharadwaj AND State of Karnataka. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 188

Ramesh Naik L AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 189

Vidya M V AND Bhavana S. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 190

Rait Sena Karnataka AND Union of India & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 191

Naveen Kumar N & Others AND M/S Karnataka Power Corporation Limited & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 192

Shashank J Rai AND National Anti Doping Agency-India & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 193

Judgements/Orders

Mere Use Of Abusive Language Not By Itself Intentional Insult U/S 504 IPC: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Anumandala Rajesh Reddy AND State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8897 OF 2023

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 185

The Karnataka High Court recently quashed a case registered by the police against an accused who while being apprehended for his involvement in another case allegedly abused the police in filthy language and tried to assault them and thereby obstructed them from discharging their duties.

A single judge, Justice Mohammad Nawaz allowing the petition filed by Anumandala Rajesh Reddy quashed the proceedings initiated against him under Sections 353 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 504 pertains to Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace.

It said, “It is not stated in the complaint the nature of abusive language used by the accused. The allegations are vague in nature. Further, mere use of abusive language would not by itself attract the ingredients of Section 504 IPC.”

Limitation Period For Issuing Notice To Drawer Excludes Day On Which Bank Informs Holder Of Cheque Dishonour: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: B R Anand AND V R Gisha

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.567 OF 2019

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 186

The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that the day on which a bank intimates to the holder of cheque of its dishonour has to be excluded and the same cannot be taken into consideration while calculating the period of limitation for issuing notice for payment to the drawer under Negotiable Instruments Act.

Section 138(b) is an important condition for the application of offence of cheque dishonour. It states:

"Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply...unless the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque, as the case may be, makes a demand for the payment of the said amount of money by giving a notice in writing, to the drawer of the cheque, [within thirty days of the receipt of information by him from the bank regarding the return of the cheque as unpaid...".

Karnataka High Court Quashes FIR Against 22-Year-Old Accused Of Reselling IPL Match Tickets At Higher Price

Case Title: Somarapu Vamashi AND State of Karnataka

Case No: Criminal Petition No 7476/2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 187

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday (May 27) quashed an FIR registered against a 22-year-old, accused of re-selling tickets purchased by him for the Indian Premier League (IPL) match at a higher price.

A vacation judge, Justice Suraj Govindaraj allowed the petition filed by Somarapu Vamashi who was charged for offence under Section 318 (4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

The petitioner was booked by the Bellandur police station on the charge that he had brought certain tickets for the IPL match to be played between Royal Challengers Bangalore and Kolkata Knight Riders at the Chinnaswamy Stadium in Bengaluru. It was alleged that ten tickets priced at Rs 1,200 each were sold by him at Rs 6,000 each to certain persons.

Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Govt Order Directing Withdrawal Of 43 Criminal Cases Against 'Highly Influential Persons'

Case title: Girish Bharadwaj AND State of Karnataka

Case No: WP 3817/2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 188

The Karnataka High Court on Thursday set aside the Government order, directing public prosecutors to withdraw 43 criminal cases registered/pending against persons accused of various offences including rioting, attempt to murder, stated to include highly influential persons including politicians, in breach of Section 321 of Criminal Procedure Code.

A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind while pronouncing its order said “Petition is allowed Government Order, dated 15-10-2024, is hereby set aside, it is declared that the order shall stand non-est since inception, consequences in law will follow.” The detailed order will be made available in due course.

The order was passed while allowing the public interest litigation filed by Girish Bharadwaj questioning a government order.

Access To Clean Water Part Of Article 21: Karnataka High Court Directs State To Frame SOP For Maintenance Of Drinking Water Facilities

Case Title: Ramesh Naik L AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WP 9911/2024

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 189

The Karnataka High Court has directed the State Government to prepare a comprehensive Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for the maintenance of the facilities by which it provides drinking water to citizens in the state.

A division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind, said “The State has a fundamental duty to supply drinking water fit for human consumption. Access to clean water is not charity, it is a constitutional promise woven into the fabric of fundamental rights. Every individual's right to life encompasses the right to access pure and safe drinking water.”

Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash FIR Against Cop For Unauthorisedly Accessing Woman's Call Detail Records, Cites Right To Privacy

Case Title: Vidya M V AND Bhavana S

Case No: WP 14869/2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 190

The Karnataka High Court on Thursday (May 29) refused to quash a criminal case registered against a police sub inspector Vidya M V, who is accused of illegally obtaining Call Detail Records (CDR) of a woman.

A vacation bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj said, “No police officer just by being a police officer can call for any CDR of any citizen of the country, without there being any investigation.”

The petitioner had approached the Court seeking to quash the case registered against her for the offences punishable under section 354(d) 409,506,509 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 66(D) and 66(E) of the Information Technology Act.

Farmers Shouldn't Be Forced Into 'Distress Sales': Karnataka High Court Directs State To Operate Procurement Centers For Two Extra Months

Case Title: Rait Sena Karnataka AND Union of India & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.12751 OF 2021

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 191

The Karnataka High Court has directed the State Government to establish at least one crop harvesting procurement center in each Taluka for two months beyond the procurement period fixed by Government of India.

A division bench of former Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind held thus while disposing of a public interest litigation filed by Rait Sena Karnataka, a registered Society which had sought a direction to the authorities to operate produce procurement centers throughout the year, to enable farmers to sell their produce at the Minimum Support Price.

It said “In view of the fact that crop harvesting now extends beyond the traditional harvesting seasons, and in order to ensure that farmers are adequately remunerated through the Minimum Support Price (MSP) mechanism and are not compelled to resort to distress sales through middlemen, the State Government shall establish at least one procurement center in each Taluka for a period of two months beyond the procurement period fixed by the Government of India.”

Karnataka High Court Directs State Power Corporation To Hold Fresh Recruitment Exam As Candidates Were Not Told About Negative Marks

Case Title: Naveen Kumar N & Others AND M/S Karnataka Power Corporation Limited & Others

Case No: WRIT APPEAL No.1298 OF 2024 (S-RES) C/W WRIT APPEAL No.1018 OF 2024 (S-RES) WRIT APPEAL No.1160 OF 2024 (S-RES) WRIT APPEAL No.1344 OF 2024

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 192

The Karnataka High Court directed the State Power Corporation Limited to conduct a fresh examination for all candidates who appeared in an earlier exam held in February 2024 for six posts, after noting that condition of negative marking had not been disclosed to the candidates prior to the conduct of the exam.

A division bench of former Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind while allowing a batch of appeals challenging a single judge order said, “The orders of learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.14233 of 2024 dated 12.06.2024 and in Writ Petition 16517 of 2024 dated 10.07.2024 are set aside. The Final Score List dated 12.06.2024 and the Provisional Score List dated 08.05.2024 are hereby quashed.”

'Sample Integrity Was Breached': Karnataka High Court Quashes 4-Year Suspension Of National Basketball Player Over Alleged Doping

Case Title: Shashank J Rai AND National Anti Doping Agency-India & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.4710 OF 2024

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 193

The Karnataka High Court recently quashed a 2022 order passed by the Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel declaring Shashank J Rai, a senior National Basketball Player, to be ineligible for sporting events for 4 years after he was accused of doping.

Justice M Nagaprasanna while allowing the petition filed by the distinguished athlete of national acclaim and said “This Court finds the impugned orders, which culminated in the order of the Appellate Authority dated 16-04-2024 vitiated by non-consideration of vital material, absence of reasoned adjudication and a palpable breach of principle of fairness.”