Pilots of the defunct Kingfisher Airlines have approached the Karnataka High Court seeking a direction to the court-appointed official liquidator to disburse their long-pending salaries. 

The Court directed the petitioners, Captain Mukesh Singh Shaktawat & Captain Desmond D’mello, to serve notice to the liquidator, scheduling the next hearing for April 8, 2026. 

Shaktawat, who served the airline for nine years, claimed dues amounting to approximately ₹1.39 crore.

Despite the liquidator finalizing the payable amounts in 2022-23 and the SBI-led consortium recovering nearly ₹14,000 crore from asset sales, the petitioners alleged that only provident fund money has been released so far.

[Mukesh Singh Shaktawat & Anr. v. Official Liquidator]

The Karnataka High Court held that the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) cannot condone delay beyond the 45-day time limit prescribed under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act.

The case involved a borrower who challenged recovery measures after the expiry of this period and sought condonation of the delay.

The Court noted that the law provides a strict 45-day deadline to ensure speedy recovery of debts, and there is no provision allowing the DRT to extend this period.

It emphasised that tribunals do not have inherent powers like courts to relax limitation unless expressly permitted by law, and therefore such delayed applications cannot be entertained.

[V. Thulsiram & Anr. v. Authorised Officer, Canara Bank & Anr.]

The Karnataka government has defended its mandatory paid menstrual leave policy before the Karnataka High Court, asserting it has a scientific and objective basis.

Advocate General Shashi Kiran Shetty argued that women's long-term health must be prioritized over the financial concerns raised by employers.

Supporting the policy, the Bengaluru Women Lawyers Association and trade unions contended that menstruation-related symptoms like dysmenorrhea act as a unique physical challenge, making differential treatment non-discriminatory under the Constitution.

Conversely, a group of fifteen women professionals filed a petition opposing the mandate, fearing it could make employers reluctant to hire women in a competitive job market.

[Karnataka Employers Association v. Government of Karnataka]

The Karnataka High Court has declined to entertain a petition by the Bangalore Hotels Association seeking an uninterrupted supply of LPG cylinders amid a global shortage.

The Court observed that the government is managing the crisis better than other nations and held that sensitive policy matters, especially during international "war-like" situations, are not subject to judicial review.

Recording the Centre’s assurances that all efforts are being made for equitable distribution, noting the executive must prioritize between commercial and domestic needs.

Aligning with the Bombay High Court's stance, the Bench disposed of the plea, emphasizing that the evolving situation remains within the executive's domain.

[Bangalore Hotels Association & Ors. v. UOI & Ors.]

The Karnataka High Court held that merely storing child sexual abuse material on a mobile phone can attract offences under Section 15 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and Section 67B of the Information Technology Act, 2000, even if the material was not transmitted or shared.

Justice M. Nagaprasanna dismissed a petition seeking to quash criminal proceedings against an accused whose phone allegedly contained sexually explicit images and videos of children.

The Court relied on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Just Rights for Children Alliance v. S. Harish and observed that the law criminalises even preparatory conduct such as storage or possession of such material.

[Sri Binoj P J v. State by Karnataka Commercial Street Police Station]

A Public Interest Litigation has been filed before the Karnataka High Court seeking the removal of illegal hoardings and commercial LED advertisement boards in Bengaluru.

The petitioner alleged that the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike and the Greater Bengaluru Authority are attempting to legitimise illegal self-LED hoardings by allowing them to be converted into commercial advertisements through a “One-Time Opportunity” process.

The plea argues that such displays amount to visual pollution and violate existing regulations governing outdoor advertisements. It also claims that permissions were granted without proper approvals and despite pending advertisement tax dues.

The petition seeks cancellation of the rule permitting such conversions and directions to authorities to remove illegal LED advertisement boards.

The Karnataka High Court refused to quash criminal proceedings against three individuals accused of facilitating illegal sex determination leading to female foeticide.

Justice M Nagaprasanna observed that female foeticide is not merely a statutory offense but a moral blight and an affront to the Constitution.

The case involves agents who allegedly used coded marks to signal a radiologist to reveal the foetus's gender. The Court found prima facie evidence of complicity, noting that leniency in such matters risks emboldening gender discrimination under the guise of medical expertise.

The Court held that these allegations must be tested in trial.

[Sardamma & Anr. v. The State of Karnataka]

The Karnataka High Court granted an interim stay on criminal proceedings against a brewery partner accused in a case linked to the suicide of a 15-year-old boy in Bengaluru.

The teenager had visited a pub with friends after a school farewell and allegedly consumed alcohol before later dying by suicide. The pub’s owner and staff were booked under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, and the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965. 

While granting temporary relief, the Court questioned how a minor was allowed to enter and consume alcohol at such establishments.

It also stressed the need for strict age verification at pubs and suggested mandatory ID checks to prevent underage drinking.

[V Chittibabu v. State of Karnataka & Anr.]

The Karnataka High Court issued notice to Google and two Sri Lankan news outlets on a plea filed by Justice AHM Dilip Nawaz, a judge of the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka, seeking the removal of allegedly defamatory online articles. 

The petition claims the reports falsely linked him to a criminal offence and continue to appear in search results despite the case being dismissed.

He invoked his right to reputation and the “right to be forgotten” under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

The Court, hearing the matter before Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum, directed notices to the respondents and scheduled the case for a preliminary hearing on March 16. 

The Karnataka High Court stayed criminal proceedings against Deputy CM DK Shivakumar concerning a 2024 Facebook post allegedly containing morphed and provocative content against BJP leaders.

The Court passed the interim order on a plea to quash the FIR, which was registered following a private complaint.

The post, appearing on the INC Karnataka page, allegedly featured BJP leaders holding placards with altered text during protests related to the 1992 Ayodhya riots case.

The complaint alleged the post aimed to promote enmity and tarnish the image of senior leaders. The Court has now sought a response from the State regarding the matter.

[D.K. Shivakumar v. State of Karnataka & Anr.]

The Karnataka High Court reserved its judgment on a petition filed by spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar seeking to quash an FIR regarding alleged encroachment of government land in Bengaluru.

The Bangalore Metropolitan Task Force (BMTF) registered the case following a PIL alleging unauthorized construction on public land and storm water drains.

The petitioner’s counsel argued that no specific allegations exist against him and that he neither owns nor encroached upon the land in question.

Conversely, the State maintained that investigation should proceed. The Court extended the existing stay on the investigation until the final disposal of the petition.

[Sri Sri Ravi Shankar v. State of Karnataka & Anr.]

The Karnataka High Court quashed a trial court order that had permitted home-cooked food for actress Pavithra Gowda and others accused in the Renukaswamy murder case.

The Court observed that while human dignity must be protected within prisons, such concessions cannot be granted as a "matter of indulgence" without prior medical examination.

Emphasizing that indiscriminate grants could lead to administrative chaos. To ensure transparency, the Bench directed the digital publication of prison menus and the establishment of a formal food quality complaint mechanism.

Accused were granted liberty to file fresh petitions, provided they are supported by medical necessity and adhere to rules.

[State of Karnataka v. Smt. Pavithra Gowda & Ors.]

The Supreme Court ruled that an employer must personally pay the penalty for delaying compensation under the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923, even if the compensation amount is covered by insurance.

The Court clarified that the penalty under Section 4A(3)(b) arises from the employer’s own default and cannot be shifted to the insurance company.

The case arose after an employee died in a work-related accident and compensation was not paid within the statutory period.

While the insurer may pay compensation and interest, the Court held that the penalty must be borne by the employer to ensure timely payment and maintain the deterrent purpose of the law.

The Karnataka High Court cautioned against the growing misuse of Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, to criminalise consensual sexual relationships after breakups.

Justice M. Nagaprasanna observed that such cases are “mushrooming” before the Court, where allegations of false promise of marriage are invoked once relationships sour.

Granting interim relief, the Court stayed investigation and ordered the accused’s release from custody, noting that the relationship appeared consensual.

It also expressed concern over routine arrests in such cases merely because the offence carries a maximum sentence of ten years.