The Karnataka High Court held that a Muslim man’s second marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 is void if his first marriage still subsists. It ruled that opting for the secular law overrides the polygamy permitted under Muslim personal law.
The Karnataka High Court directed a law college to remove promotional banners featuring a person in an advocate’s gown, holding that the BCI Rules prohibit such advertising, and granted the institution eight weeks to replace the banners to uphold the legal profession’s dignity.
The Karnataka High Court quashed an FIR against a student who called a classmate “pretty” in an Instagram DM, holding that Gen Z lingo in a private chat cannot be criminalised.
The Karnataka High Court refused a husband’s divorce plea under Section 13(1A) of the Hindu Marriage Act, holding a Hindu marriage is a sacrament, not a contract to exit at will.
The Supreme Court questioned the Karnataka High Court’s decision to discharge JD(S) leader H.D. Revanna in a sexual harassment case filed by a former domestic worker. “How can the High Court change the charges after the trial court took cognisance?” the Bench asked.
The Karnataka High Court stayed criminal proceedings against a Coorg homestay owner accused after an employee allegedly raped a 33-year-old American tourist. The Court questioned charges under the repealed Foreigners Act, 1946 and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, while allowing proceedings against the principal accused to continue.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act cannot continue against a former director when a cheque was issued after the company’s dissolution. The Court held that a dissolved company lacks legal existence, making such cheques legally unenforceable.
The Karnataka High Court refused to quash an FIR against Divyajyothi School, holding that a school bus is an extension of the school. The Court remarked, “The safety of children in a school bus is not a matter of charity or convenience; it is a solemn obligation mandated under the Statute as well.”
The Karnataka High Court questioned Darshan Srinivas’s claim that the Kannada film BOSS could affect the fairness of his Renukaswamy murder trial. Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur observed that the concern should be possible impact on witnesses and proceedings, not whether judges could be influenced.
The Supreme Court directed maintenance of status quo on the Karnataka High Court order enhancing ethanol allocation for ESY 2025–26. The Court was hearing an oil marketing company’s plea claiming that the direction could affect the national policy targeting 20% ethanol blending in petrol.
