Karnataka High Court Weekly Roundup: May 19 - May 25, 2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 181 to  2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 184

Nominal Index:

Shrishail Irappa Kempwad & ANR And State of Karnataka & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 180

Savinaya AND Mrs Sheela G Bhat & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 181

Karnataka State Private Management Association of Health Institutions AND State of Karnataka & Others. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 182

Addanada Karriappa And Philiphose Mathew. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 183

Athaulla Jokatte & AND And State Of Karnataka. 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 184

Judgments/Orders

'Cooperative Farming Critical To Indian Agriculture': Karnataka HC Holds GO Refusing Power Subsidy To Farmers' Societies Unconstitutional

Case Title: Shrishail Irappa Kempwad & ANR And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 103671 OF 2021

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 180

The Karnataka High Court recently held as unconstitutional a government order dated September 4, 2008, which denied the benefit of power tariff subsidy to farmers' societies purely on the ground of their collective consumption exceeding the specified power limit.

Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum holding thus directed the State Government and the concerned electricity distribution companies (including HESCOM) to review, reconsider, and amend the existing policy framework governing agricultural power subsidies, ensuring that farmer societies are treated at par with individual farmers.

“Consequently, it is declared that the impugned Government Order No. EN 55 PSR 2008 dated 4th September 2008 is unconstitutional, in so far as it denies the benefit of power tariff subsidy to farmer societies purely on the ground of collective consumption exceeding the specified horsepower limit...The authorities must frame and notify appropriate guidelines within a reasonable period (preferably within six months) to extend power tariff subsidies to registered farmer societies, in a manner that aligns with the principles of equality, promotes cooperative farming, and advances the broader goals of sustainable agricultural development,” it said.

Court Can't Interfere Over Potential Business Loss Due To Location Of Jan Aushadhi Kendras, Must Preserve Welfare: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Savinaya AND Mrs Sheela G Bhat & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION No.13685 OF 2024

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 181

The Karnataka High Court recently refused to interdict the final approval granted to a woman entrepreneur to operate a Kendra (centre) under the Pradhan Mantri Bhartiya Janaushadhi Pariyojana (PMBJP) at Kumbra Village in Puttur Taluk.

Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed the petition filed by one Savinaya also a female entrepreneur who had approached the court questioning the final approval given to operate the Kendra to another woman Sheela G Bhat.

Kendras or centres ensure availability of quality medicine at low prices, where medicines could be sold at 50% to 90% cheaper rates, compared to market rates. It said

"What is projected by the petitioner is purported loss of business by granting another Kendra within a short distance, while it is not the case, as the facts bare consideration hereinabove. But, it would not be for this court to interfere merely because a business prospect is perceived to be threatened rather, the Court must preserve the spirit of a welfare-oriented scheme designed for the many, not the few. There is no arbitrariness that is demonstrable or palpable in the case at hand. The geographical area that is contended to be overlapping, has not overlapped, as the application of the petitioner remained an application. Therefore, in conclusion, I find the petition is devoid of merit. No illegality, procedural infirmity or arbitrariness is 28 discernable from the grant of approval to the 1st respondent, to iterate public interest would be ill-served if this Court were to interdict a lawful and beneficial initiative on such slender grounds"

Deputy Commissioner Has No Expertise To Inspect Nursing Institutes, Can Be Done Only By Specialised Agencies: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Karnataka State Private Management Association of Health Institutions AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 32106 OF 2024 (EDN-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 32185 OF 2024.

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 182

The Karnataka High Court has set aside a November 5, 2024 communication issued by the Principal Secretary, Family and Welfare Department, directing Deputy Commissioners of all the districts in the State to carry out inspection of Nursing Institutions situated within their jurisdiction.

Justice Suraj Govindaraj held thus while allowing the petition filed by Karnataka State Private Management Association of Health Institutions.

Noting that the letter issued is only an instruction and not a policy decision, it said “The Deputy Commissioner not having any expertise in educational facilities, the nature of the subject experts, the qualification thereof, not having been indicated in the instruction dated 5-11 2024, I am of the considered opinion that the said letter is completely arbitrary, the exercise of powers by the Deputy Commissioner is unbridled and such inspection is not under any particular enactment.”

Karnataka High Court Acquits Newspaper's Editor In Defamation Case, Says Onus Was On Complainant To Show Before Whom His Image Was Lowered

Case Title: Addanada Karriappa And Philiphose Mathew

Case No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1044 OF 2017

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 183

The Karnataka High Court recently set aside the conviction order passed by the trial court against Addanada Kariappa, Editor of Kannada Weekly Newspaper Veeranadu, in a criminal defamation case.

A single judge, Justice Rajesh Rai K by his order dated (April 8), acquitted the accused who was convicted by the trial court for offences punishable under Section 499, 500 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for 7 days and to pay fine of Rs.10,000.

Karnataka High Court Quashes Rioting, Unlawful Assembly Case Against 8 For Protesting Against Implementation Of CAA-NRC

Case Title: Athaulla Jokatte & AND And State Of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6797 OF 2022

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 184

The Karnataka High Court recently quashed prosecution initiated against eight persons who were accused of rioting and participating in an unlawful assembly in 2019 to protest against implementation of CAA-NRC.

According to the prosecution all the accused conspired to protest against implementation of CAA-NRC and assembled at the spot forming an unlawful assembly, inspite of restrictions imposed and pelted stones, soda bottles etc., at public properties.