{"id":276255,"date":"2022-10-28T12:00:47","date_gmt":"2022-10-28T06:30:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=276255"},"modified":"2022-10-28T12:00:47","modified_gmt":"2022-10-28T06:30:47","slug":"karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/","title":{"rendered":"What is the legal evidentiary value of a Google Review? Karnataka High Court elucidates"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"text-align: justify; line-height: 150%;\">\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt;\">&#160; &#160;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\"><b>Karnataka High Court<\/b>: While deciding the instant petition for anticipatory bail, the Bench of Rajendra Badamikar, J., observed that google search disclosures or google reviews indicating that an individual has cheated number of persons, cannot be accepted, as google reviews do not have any legal evidentiary value.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">The complainant was doing business of lamp oil in respect of which, she had opened the bank account in the Axis Bank, Kumaraswamy layout branch. When she searched in Google for liquid paraffin in respect of manufacturing of the lamp-oil, she came in contact with the petitioner-accused who was dealing with supply of paraffin. The complainant via e-mail transaction initially paid Rs. 52,39,400 in two installments by way of NEFT to the account of the petitioner-accused; however, the petitioner-accused only supplied the goods worth of Rs. 26,31,611.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">She tried to contact the petitioner-accused several times through the mobile-phone but received no response. Hence, she was constrained to lodge a complaint under Sections <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001561756\">419<\/a>, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001561758\">420<\/a> of <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726960\">Penal Code, 1860<\/a> and under Sections <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001540650\">66(C)<\/a> and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001540650\">66(D)<\/a> of <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002796572\">Information Technology Act, 2000<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">On the basis of the said complaint, a case came to be registered against the petitioner-accused and the petitioner apprehending his arrest approached the Trial Court. But the Civil Judge rejected the anticipatory bail petition.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">The counsel for the petitioner-accused contended that he does not have any intention of cheating the complainant and that he has to get the goods from the foreign country and due to the war between the Ukraine and Russia, there was delay in supply of the consignment, so he could not supply the goods to the complainant.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\"><i>Per contra<\/i>, the respondents contended that the petitioner-accused is a habitual offender and the same can be traced through the google search wherein the review discloses that he has cheated a number of people in this regard.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">Perusing the facts and contentions of the case, the Court observed that Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001561756\">419<\/a>, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726960\">IPC<\/a> is not attracted in the instant case as there is no impersonation and the only allegation is that of cheating.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court also disagreed with the contention of respondent concerning the petitioner&#8217;s google reviews and stated that google reviews have no illegal evidentiary value.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court did not find an impediment to refuse the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, therefore the petition was allowed with suitable conditions and directions.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\">[<span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: #632423;\">Om Pratap Singh v. The Station House Officer, CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8879\/2022, decided on 13-10-2022<\/span>]<\/p>\n<hr\/>\n<p>Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt;\">R. Gopala Krishnan, Advocate for the Petitioner;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt;\">Rashmi Jadhav, HCGP for the Respondent.<\/p>\n<hr\/>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #000080;\">*Sucheta Sarkar, Editorial Assistant has prepared this brief.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>&#160; &#160; Karnataka High Court: While deciding the instant petition for anticipatory bail, the Bench of Rajendra Badamikar, J., observed that google <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":273932,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[32378,2521,2889,52569,38333,28334,52570,52571,52572,52573],"class_list":["post-276255","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-cheating","tag-Evidence","tag-google","tag-google-reviews","tag-google-search","tag-karnataka-high-court","tag-lamp-oil","tag-paraffin","tag-ukraine-russia","tag-war"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>What is the legal evidentiary value of a Google Review? Karnataka High Court elucidates | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"While deciding the instant petition for anticipatory bail, the Bench of Rajendra Badamikar, J., observed that google search disclosures\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"What is the legal evidentiary value of a Google Review? Karnataka High Court elucidates\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"While deciding the instant petition for anticipatory bail, the Bench of Rajendra Badamikar, J., observed that google search disclosures\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2022-10-28T06:30:47+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Karnataka-High-Court-1.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/\",\"name\":\"What is the legal evidentiary value of a Google Review? Karnataka High Court elucidates | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Karnataka-High-Court-1.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-10-28T06:30:47+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"While deciding the instant petition for anticipatory bail, the Bench of Rajendra Badamikar, J., observed that google search disclosures\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Karnataka-High-Court-1.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Karnataka-High-Court-1.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":888,\"caption\":\"Karnataka High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"What is the legal evidentiary value of a Google Review? Karnataka High Court elucidates\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"What is the legal evidentiary value of a Google Review? Karnataka High Court elucidates | SCC Times","description":"While deciding the instant petition for anticipatory bail, the Bench of Rajendra Badamikar, J., observed that google search disclosures","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"What is the legal evidentiary value of a Google Review? Karnataka High Court elucidates","og_description":"While deciding the instant petition for anticipatory bail, the Bench of Rajendra Badamikar, J., observed that google search disclosures","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2022-10-28T06:30:47+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Karnataka-High-Court-1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/","name":"What is the legal evidentiary value of a Google Review? Karnataka High Court elucidates | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Karnataka-High-Court-1.jpg","datePublished":"2022-10-28T06:30:47+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"While deciding the instant petition for anticipatory bail, the Bench of Rajendra Badamikar, J., observed that google search disclosures","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Karnataka-High-Court-1.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Karnataka-High-Court-1.jpg","width":1331,"height":888,"caption":"Karnataka High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-review-legal-evidence-value-legal-news-legal-updates\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"What is the legal evidentiary value of a Google Review? Karnataka High Court elucidates"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Karnataka-High-Court-1.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":295259,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/23\/karnataka-hc-relief-man-accused-married-woman-breach-of-promise-to-marry-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":276255,"position":0},"title":"Married woman cannot claim breach of promise to marry: Karnataka High Court","author":"Sucheta","date":"June 23, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court pointed out that merely because the petitioner provided monetary help to the woman, it cannot be said that they are married. Since the woman was already married, there is no case of breach of promise to marry either.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"karnataka high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/karnataka-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/karnataka-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/karnataka-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/karnataka-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":354673,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/28\/karnataka-high-court-google-india-distinct-legal-entity-than-google-llc-youtube\/","url_meta":{"origin":276255,"position":1},"title":"Google India distinct legal entity than Google LLC, cannot be sued for content posted on Google LLC and YouTube: Karnataka HC","author":"Editor","date":"July 28, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court noted that in absence of any specific allegations against Google India regarding derogatory material on their website the respondent cannot proceed against them.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Google India different entity from Google LLC","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Google-India-different-entity-from-Google-LLC.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Google-India-different-entity-from-Google-LLC.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Google-India-different-entity-from-Google-LLC.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Google-India-different-entity-from-Google-LLC.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":297718,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/07\/26\/second-wife-complaint-section-498-a-penal-code-not-maintainable-karnataka-high-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":276255,"position":2},"title":"Complaint under S. 498-A, IPC filed by the second wife against the husband and in-laws cannot be maintainable: Karnataka High Court","author":"Sucheta","date":"July 26, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court pointed out that \u2018woman\u2019 as per S. 498-A, IPC means and includes a legally wedded wife.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"karnataka high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/karnataka-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/karnataka-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/karnataka-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/karnataka-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":277550,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/15\/definition-of-victim-as-found-in-crpc-cannot-be-rendered-a-restrictive-meaning-karnataka-hcholds-that-legal-heir-has-locus-to-continue-the-case-initiated-by-the-deceased-c\/","url_meta":{"origin":276255,"position":3},"title":"\u201cDefinition of \u2018victim\u2019 as found in CrPC cannot be rendered a restrictive meaning\u201d; Karnataka HC holds that legal heir has locus to continue the case initiated by the deceased complainant","author":"Editor","date":"November 15, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Karnataka High Court: In the instant petition for quashment, the issue arose that whether a legal heir should be permitted to come on record and prosecute the case in place of the informant or with the death of the informant, the act initiated by the informant also dies? The Bench\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Karnataka High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Karnataka-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Karnataka-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Karnataka-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Karnataka-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Karnataka-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":224055,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/09\/bom-hc-s-139-ni-act-imposes-evidentiary-burden-and-not-a-persuasive-burden-acquittal-upheld-where-complainant-failed-to-prove-capacity-to-give-loan\/","url_meta":{"origin":276255,"position":4},"title":"Bom HC | S. 139 NI Act imposes evidentiary burden and not a persuasive burden; acquittal upheld where complainant failed to prove capacity to give loan","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 9, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court:\u00a0K.R. Shriram, J., dismissed a criminal appeal filed against the order of the trial court whereby it had acquitted the accused of charges under Section 138\u00a0(dishonour of cheque)\u00a0of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. As per the complainant, she had given a loan of Rs 4.5 lakhs to the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":275352,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/11\/karnataka-hc-raises-concern-rise-of-pseudo-therapists-instagram-influencers-regulations-needed-public-domain-mental-health-legal-news-and-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":276255,"position":5},"title":"&#8220;Rise of the pseudo-therapists on public domain who are but camouflaged instagram influencers, needs to be regulated&#8221;; Karnataka HC expresses concern","author":"Editor","date":"October 11, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Karnataka High Court: While deliberating over the instant petition seeking quashment of chargesheet filed against a \"wellness therapist\" under the provisions of Information and Technology Act, 2000 and Penal Code, 1860, the Bench of M. Nagaprasanna, J., observed that the mushrooming rise of so-called \"wellness therapies\" in the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Karnataka High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Karnataka-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Karnataka-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Karnataka-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Karnataka-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Karnataka-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/276255","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=276255"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/276255\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/273932"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=276255"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=276255"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=276255"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}