Log In
  • India
  • UK & Ireland
CaseMine Logo
Please enter at least 3 characters.
Parallel Search is an AI-driven legal research functionality that uses natural language understanding to find conceptually relevant case law, even without exact keyword matches.
Hi, I'm AMICUS. Your GPT powered virtual legal assistant. Let's chat.
  • Parallel Search NEW
  • CaseIQ
  • AMICUS (Powered by GPT)
  • Federal
    U.S. Supreme Court
    Federal Circuit
    1st Circuit
    2d Circuit
    3d Circuit
    4th Circuit
    5th Circuit
    6th Circuit
    7th Circuit
    8th Circuit
    9th Circuit
    10th Circuit
    11th Circuit
    Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Special Courts
    Bankruptcy
  • State
    Alabama
    Alaska
    Arkansas
    Arizona
    California
    Colorado
    Connecticut
    Delaware
    District Of Columbia
    Florida
    Georgia
    Guam
    Hawaii
    Iowa
    Idaho
    Illinois
    Indiana
    Kansas
    Kentucky
    Louisiana
    Massachusetts
    Maryland
    Maine
    Michigan
    Minnesota
    Missouri
    Mississippi
    Montana
    Nebraska
    North Carolina
    North Dakota
    New Hampshire
    New Jersey
    Northern Mariana Islands
    New Mexico
    Nevada
    New York
    Ohio
    Oklahoma
    Oregon
    Pennsylvania
    Puerto Rico
    Rhode Island
    South Carolina
    South Dakota
    Tennessee
    Texas
    Utah
    Virginia
    Vermont
    Washington
    Wisconsin
    West Virginia
    Wyoming
Log In Sign Up US Judgments
  • India
  • UK & Ireland

Alert

How is this helpful for me?

  • Creating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. Once you create your profile, you will be able to:
    1. Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work.
    2. Interact directly with CaseMine users looking for advocates in your area of specialization.
  • Creating a unique profile web page containing interviews, posts, articles, as well as the cases you have appeared in, greatly enhances your digital presence on search engines such Google and Bing, resulting in increased client interest.
  • The cases linked on your profile facilitate Casemine's artificial intelligence engine in recommending you to potential clients who might be interested in availing your services for similar matters.

  Know more  

Create your profile now
  • Commentaries
  • Judgments
  • Acts

Karnataka High Court Case Commentaries

Karnataka High Court shuts the door on successive Section 482/BNSS 528 petitions without a change in circumstances; quashing post-charge-sheet remains an exception

Karnataka High Court shuts the door on successive Section 482/BNSS 528 petitions without a change in circumstances; quashing post-charge-sheet remains an exception

Date: Sep 4, 2025
Karnataka High Court clarifies: No successive Section 482/BNSS 528 petitions on grounds available earlier; post-charge-sheet quashing is exceptional Introduction In Sri G. Satyanarayana Varma v....
Karnataka High Court clarifies: Fixed-term 20+ year sentences do not per se bar remission; eligibility endures unless the sentencing court expressly excludes it

Karnataka High Court clarifies: Fixed-term 20+ year sentences do not per se bar remission; eligibility endures unless the sentencing court expressly excludes it

Date: Aug 23, 2025
Karnataka High Court clarifies: Fixed-term 20+ year sentences do not per se bar remission; eligibility endures unless the sentencing court expressly excludes it Introduction This commentary examines...
Limitations on Amending an “Adopted” Written Statement under Order VI Rule 17 CPC – Comment on Smt. Seeta v. Smt. Laxmi (2025)

Limitations on Amending an “Adopted” Written Statement under Order VI Rule 17 CPC – Comment on Smt. Seeta v. Smt. Laxmi (2025)

Date: Aug 21, 2025
Limitations on Amending an “Adopted” Written Statement under Order VI Rule 17 CPC – Commentary on the Karnataka High Court’s Decision in Smt. Seeta v. Smt. Laxmi (2025) 1. Introduction Court & Date:...
No Prospectus, No Precondition: Karnataka High Court Declares Full-Course Bank Guarantee Demands Ultra Vires and Awards Compensation for Wrongful Denial of MBBS Admission

No Prospectus, No Precondition: Karnataka High Court Declares Full-Course Bank Guarantee Demands Ultra Vires and Awards Compensation for Wrongful Denial of MBBS Admission

Date: Aug 21, 2025
No Prospectus, No Precondition: Karnataka High Court Declares Full-Course Bank Guarantee Demands Ultra Vires and Awards Compensation for Wrongful Denial of MBBS Admission Introduction In Sanjana V...
Re-defining the Scope of Judicial Review in Service Disciplinary Matters – The “K.M. Gangadhar Standard”

Re-defining the Scope of Judicial Review in Service Disciplinary Matters – The “K.M. Gangadhar Standard”

Date: Aug 20, 2025
Re-defining the Scope of Judicial Review in Service Disciplinary Matters – The “K.M. Gangadhar Standard” Introduction Writ Appeal No. 600 of 2025, Sri K.M. Gangadhar v. State of Karnataka & Anr.,...
“The Pre-Deceased Spouse Exception” – Karnataka High Court Clarifies Eligibility for Compassionate Appointment

“The Pre-Deceased Spouse Exception” – Karnataka High Court Clarifies Eligibility for Compassionate Appointment

Date: Aug 20, 2025
“The Pre-Deceased Spouse Exception” – Karnataka High Court Clarifies Eligibility for Compassionate Appointment 1. Introduction The decision in Smt. Mantavva & Anr. v. The Divisional Controller,...
"Once a State Forest, Always a Forest": Karnataka High Court’s boundary-based test, strict Section 20 exception, and a blueprint for unified geo-spatial land governance

"Once a State Forest, Always a Forest": Karnataka High Court’s boundary-based test, strict Section 20 exception, and a blueprint for unified geo-spatial land governance

Date: Aug 19, 2025
"Once a State Forest, Always a Forest": Karnataka High Court’s boundary-based test, strict Section 20 exception, and a blueprint for unified geo-spatial land governance Introduction In M/s Prakruti...
Pendency of Appeal and Non‑Filing of Bail Are No Bar to Parole: Karnataka High Court Reinforces Reasoned, Manual‑Compliant Parole Decisions

Pendency of Appeal and Non‑Filing of Bail Are No Bar to Parole: Karnataka High Court Reinforces Reasoned, Manual‑Compliant Parole Decisions

Date: Aug 15, 2025
Pendency of Appeal and Non‑Filing of Bail Are No Bar to Parole: Karnataka High Court Reinforces Reasoned, Manual‑Compliant Parole Decisions Case: Eshwaramma W/o Naganagowda v. State of Karnataka...

        Parole as a Protected Article 21 Right: Karnataka High Court
        Outlaws “Mechanical” Police Reports & Clarifies the Distinction
        Between Parole and Suspension of Sentence

Parole as a Protected Article 21 Right: Karnataka High Court Outlaws “Mechanical” Police Reports & Clarifies the Distinction Between Parole and Suspension of Sentence

Date: Aug 15, 2025
Parole as a Protected Article 21 Right: Karnataka High Court Outlaws “Mechanical” Police Reports & Clarifies the Distinction Between Parole and Suspension of Sentence Chotti Bee w/o Syed Rasool v....
Humanitarian Exception to Age Bar in Compassionate Appointments: Karnataka High Court authorizes appointment of widow beyond upper age limit and urges humane policy reform

Humanitarian Exception to Age Bar in Compassionate Appointments: Karnataka High Court authorizes appointment of widow beyond upper age limit and urges humane policy reform

Date: Aug 15, 2025
Humanitarian Exception to Age Bar in Compassionate Appointments: Karnataka High Court authorizes appointment of widow beyond upper age limit and urges humane policy reform Introduction This...
Candidacy Begins on Nomination: Karnataka High Court Reaffirms that Only Post‑Nomination Acts Can Constitute “Corrupt Practices” under Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act

Candidacy Begins on Nomination: Karnataka High Court Reaffirms that Only Post‑Nomination Acts Can Constitute “Corrupt Practices” under Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act

Date: Aug 1, 2025
Candidacy Begins on Nomination: Karnataka High Court Reaffirms that Only Post‑Nomination Acts Can Constitute “Corrupt Practices” under Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act Introduction...
Clarifying “Demand-and-Acceptance”: Karnataka High Court narrows Section 7 P.C. Act liability for unwitting intermediaries

Clarifying “Demand-and-Acceptance”: Karnataka High Court narrows Section 7 P.C. Act liability for unwitting intermediaries

Date: Jul 31, 2025
Clarifying “Demand-and-Acceptance”: Karnataka High Court narrows Section 7 P.C. Act liability for unwitting intermediaries 1. Introduction In Murali Krishna R v. State of Karnataka (Karnataka High...
Forged-Document Misconduct and Proportionality of Punishment: Malurappa v. BMTC (Karnataka HC 2025)

Forged-Document Misconduct and Proportionality of Punishment: Malurappa v. BMTC (Karnataka HC 2025)

Date: Jul 26, 2025
Forged-Document Misconduct and the Limits of Labour-Court Interference Commentary on Sri Malurappa v. Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation, WA 1222/2024, Karnataka High Court, 25 July 2025 1....
Uniform Sentencing Guidelines for Cheque-Dishonour Offences: Karnataka High Court’s Pronouncement in M/s Banavathy & Co. v. Mahaeer Electro Mech (P) Ltd.

Uniform Sentencing Guidelines for Cheque-Dishonour Offences: Karnataka High Court’s Pronouncement in M/s Banavathy & Co. v. Mahaeer Electro Mech (P) Ltd.

Date: Jul 10, 2025
Uniform Sentencing Guidelines for Cheque-Dishonour Offences: Karnataka High Court’s Pronouncement in M/s Banavathy & Company v. Mahaeer Electro Mech (P) Ltd 1. Introduction The Karnataka High Court,...

        The “Specificity & Corporate Distinction” Doctrine:  
        Karnataka High Court on Pleading Requirements and Proper Party
        Identification in Online Defamation Suits – Google India Pvt. Ltd. v. Nayana Krishna

The “Specificity & Corporate Distinction” Doctrine: Karnataka High Court on Pleading Requirements and Proper Party Identification in Online Defamation Suits – Google India Pvt. Ltd. v. Nayana Krishna

Date: Jul 10, 2025
The “Specificity & Corporate Distinction” Doctrine Karnataka High Court on Pleading Requirements and Proper Party Identification in Online Defamation Suits Introduction In Google India Private...
Commentary – Posthumous Registration of Wills Held Valid & Limits on Inquiry at Interlocutory Stage

Commentary – Posthumous Registration of Wills Held Valid & Limits on Inquiry at Interlocutory Stage

Date: Jul 8, 2025
“Fence but Do Not Pre-Judge” – Karnataka High Court Validates Posthumous Registration of Wills and Restricts Merit Analysis at the Interim-Injunction Stage 1. Introduction In Smt. M.D. Devamma (by...
“No Compulsion in Custom” – Karnataka High Court Affirms the Right to Abstain from Traditional Tasks during Communal Festivities

“No Compulsion in Custom” – Karnataka High Court Affirms the Right to Abstain from Traditional Tasks during Communal Festivities

Date: Jun 30, 2025
“No Compulsion in Custom” – Karnataka High Court Affirms the Right to Abstain from Traditional Tasks during Communal Festivities Madiga Dandora v. State of Karnataka, W.P. No. 201685 of 2025,...
Remission Rights Clarified: Mandatory Separate Consideration of “Good-Behaviour” Remission under Rule 166(i)(e) – Commentary on Arun Kumar Alva v. State of Karnataka (2025)

Remission Rights Clarified: Mandatory Separate Consideration of “Good-Behaviour” Remission under Rule 166(i)(e) – Commentary on Arun Kumar Alva v. State of Karnataka (2025)

Date: Jun 11, 2025
Remission Rights Clarified: Mandatory Separate Consideration of “Good-Behaviour” Remission under Rule 166(i)(e) Commentary on Arun Kumar Alva v. State of Karnataka, Karnataka High Court, WP No. 14015...
Judicial Accommodation for Special Circumstances: Ensuring Equal Opportunity for Pregnant Candidates

Judicial Accommodation for Special Circumstances: Ensuring Equal Opportunity for Pregnant Candidates

Date: Apr 11, 2025
Judicial Accommodation for Special Circumstances: Ensuring Equal Opportunity for Pregnant Candidates Introduction In the landmark case of Mahalaxmi v. The Karnataka Public Service Commission, the...
Uniform Classification Principle for Article 15(4) and Article 16(4) Reservations

Uniform Classification Principle for Article 15(4) and Article 16(4) Reservations

Date: Apr 10, 2025
Uniform Classification Principle for Article 15(4) and Article 16(4) Reservations 1. Introduction Smt. V. Sumitra v. State of Karnataka (WP No. 15499/2013) arose from a challenge to the dual...
Next
CaseMine Logo

Know us better!

  • Request a Demo
  • Watch Casemine overview Videos

Company

  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • Careers
  • Columns
  • Contact Us

Help

  • Pricing
  • Help & Support
  • Features
  • Workflow
  • CaseMine API
  • CaseMine's Bespoke AI Solutions
  • Judge Signup
  • Student Signup

CaseMine Tools

  • CaseIQ
  • Judgment Search
  • Parallel Search
  • AttorneyIQ
  • Browse Cases

© 2023 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Summary

Alert