Kerala High Court Quarterly Digest: July To September 2022 [Citation 314-507]

Bharat Petroleum Corporation & Anr v. Saju A.R & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 314

Southern Railway v. M/s Cherian Varkey Construction Co. Pvt Ltd, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 315

Abdul Jaleel v. Cabinet Principal Secretary & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 316

R. Baji v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation Ltd, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 317

Saritha S. Nair v. Union of India & Anr, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 318

Vasu Kallayi v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 320

Akhil P.S v. Director General of Police & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 326

State of Kerala & Anr v. Dr. K. Mohamed Akbar & Ors. and connected matters 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 327

Bijoy v. Gopinathan & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 328

Jibin Joseph v. Union Territory of Lakshadweep & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 329

State of Kerala v. DR.JOHN PANICKER 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 330

Faizal Kulappadam @ Faizal N v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 331

C Abdul Aziz & Ors. v Chembukandy Safiya & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 332

Akhil M v. Union of India & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 333

Binoy Kurian v. Varkey Joseph 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 334

Navaneeth N Nath v State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 335

University of Calicut v. Mohamed Sajid T & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 336

Thomas v. R. Murugasamy 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 337

Inspector General of Registration & Anr v. Riyasudheen K & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 338

Olorumemi Benjamin Baba Femi v. Union of India 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 391

P.K Shanmughan v. District Collector & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 392

Tresa K.J v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 393

Rajesh Chandran v. M.R. Gopalakrishnan Nair & ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 394

Gouri Dev S.B & Ors. v. University Grants Commission & Ors. and connected matters 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 395

Vasanthan B. v. Sub Inspector of Police & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 396

M/s Hedge Finance Pvt. Ltd v. Bijish Joseph 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 397

Adv. Antony Raju v. State Of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 398

Aboobacker K.A & Ors. v. Joint Regional Transport Officer & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 399

Centre for Professional and Advanced Studies v. Abhitha Karun & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 400

Sahara Granites v. District Geologist and others 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 401

G. Vipinan v. Union of India 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 402

Suo Motu v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 403

Mannam Sugar Mills Corporative Ltd v. Deputy Superintendent of Police 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 404

Ajayakumar & Anr. v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 405

K.M Mohammed Kutty v. State Transport Commissioner & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 406

Aboobacker v. Valanchery Municipality and Others 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 407

K.M Mohammed Kutty v. State Transport Commissioner & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 408

Tresa K.J v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 409

Saju v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 410

Jumaila Beevi v. A. Nissar 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 411

Jose Kuruvinakkunnel @ Kuruvinakkunnel Kuruvachan v Union of India 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 412

Fathima S & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Anr. 2022 LIiveLaw(Ker) 413

Baby S v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 414

anayppilly Sree Narayana Guruswami Trust v. Corporation of Kochi & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 415

Linson Thomas v. State of Kerala and Others. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 416

Nimal James & Ors v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 417

C.P Ajithkumar & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 418

Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan v. Elna Chinchu 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 419

Jincy K v. Vivek M.P 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 420

Saritha S. Nair v. Union of India 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 421

Mahanas Moidu v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 422

Hindustan Steel and Cement Versus Assistant State Tax Officer 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 423

Biny Kuriakose v. Joseph Sebastian & connected matters. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 424

Godson v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 425

Divyamol R. S. v. The Director General and others 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 426

Gopika Jain & Anr v. Faisal M.A 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 427

Nirupama Padmakumar & Ors. v State of Kerala & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 428

M/s Vodafone Idea Ltd v. Kerala State Pollution Control Board & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 429

Ramesh v. Chief Investigation Officer & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 430

Dr K P Hamsakoya vs Union Territory Of Lakshadweep [BAIL APPL. NO. 1464 OF 2022] 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 431

K.J. Varghese v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 432

xxxxxxx v. xxxxxxxxxx 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 433

Basil George v. Shaji Salim & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 434

Gaurav Tewari v. Union of India 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 435

Abhilash Kumar R. & Ors. v. Kerala Books and Publication Society & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 436

Salikuttan N. v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 437

Santhosh Kumar v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 438

XXXXXXXXXX v. Union of India & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 439

Swapna Prabha Suresh v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 440

Mathew Daniel v. Leena Mathew 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 441

Shybu B. v. Sajeev 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 442

Shibu & Anr v. Sreekumaran & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 443

M. P. Chothy v. Registrar General & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 444

Flemingo Duty Free Shop Private Ltd. versus Airports Authority of India 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 445

Dr Joseph Skariah v. Vice Chancellor (Selection Committee Chairman) 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 446

Sri Sivabalan Transports & Ors v. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 447

Mohammed Kasim H.K. v. Union Territory of Lakshadweep & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 448

Sooraj V. Kumar v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 449

Vidya Gopan & Anr v. High Court of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 450

Anuvarudeen v. Sabina 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 451

Usha Bai & Ors v. Pandikasalya Niyas & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 452

Madeswari v. K. Manickam 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 453

Anoop v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 454

Nisha Vellapan Nair v. The Mahatma Gandhi University & Anr. and Reka Raj v. Nisha Vellapan Nair & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 455

Sanskruthi Motors v. The Joint Commissioner (Appeals) II 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 456

Noorul Islam Samskarika Sangham v. The District Collector, Malappuram & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 457

Rubber Wood India Pvt Ltd & Ors v. Manojkumar P.S. & Ors. and Rubber Board v. Manojkumar P.S. & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 456

James Robert Edward Peirce & Ors. v. Anna Mathew & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 457

Usha Rajan v. Tripunithura Municipality & Ors. and S. Umesh Shenoy v. Tripunithura Municipality & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 458

Pathanapuram Taluk Samajam & Ors. v. K.K. Surendran & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 459

Fathima Thazkiya O v. National Medical Commission and Connected Cases 2022 LiveLaw(Ker)460

Dr. C.S. Rajan v. The Registrar, Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 461

tate Tax Officer & Anr Vs. Baiju A.A 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 462

xxxx v. xxxx 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 463

S. Krishnakumar v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 464

Sudheer Ram S. & Ors. v. KSRTC & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 465

Howe Engineering Projects (I) Pvt. Ltd. & 3 Ors. v. State of Kerala & 27 Ors. and M/S Adani Vizhinjam Port Pvt Ltd & 2 Ors v. State of Kerala & 27 Ors. 2022 LiveLaw Ker 466

ahir Hussain v. State of Kerala & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 467

Manager, Malankara Syrian Catholic Colleges & Ors v. Dr Reshmi P.R. & Ors and other connected cases 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 468

A. Krishnan v. The Kerala State Co-operative Marking Federation Ltd 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 469

Shaju@Shaju v. State of Kerala & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 470

General Convenor, Kerala State School Kalolsavam, 2017-2018 & Anr v. Arundhathi Krishna J. & Anr., and connected cases 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 471

K. M Basheer v. Rajani K.T & Ors and Connected cases 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 472

Abdul Majeed & Anr v. P.V. Prajosh & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 473

Sreejith T. v. The Manager, A.M. Upper Primary School & Ors, and Asha P. Vasudevan v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 474

Abdul Sathar & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 475

Shinas A. Firdaus v. Union of India & Ors and D. Pradeep Kumar v. Union of Indian & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 476

Arun v. State of Kerala & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 477

Baby Letha K. v. State of Kerala & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 478

Brinda & Ors v. Muktha K.N. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 479

Dr. Mathew Jacob & Ors v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 480

Dr Smitha Chacko v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 481

Renjith Pannackal v. State of Kerala & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 482

G. M. Sheik & Ors. v. M/s Raja Biri Private Ltd & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 483

Charley Panthallookaran v. Joint Registrar (General) of Cooperative Societies & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 484

Vinson v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 485

Sujith Lal v. Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 486

Mohammed Nisam A.A. v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 487

Jeenamol Varghese v. State of Kerala & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 488

Kasim P.H. v. Union of India & Ors., and other connected matters 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 489

S. Yadava v. Kerala State Co-Operative Bank & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 490

Marakkar & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Anr and connected cases 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 491

Bhanumathi & Anr. v. K. Abdurahiman Haji & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 492

Aisha v. Xavier & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 493

M/S SVS Marketing Sanitary Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S Bathtouch Metals Pvt. Ltd. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 494

Fasalu Rahman v. Union of India & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 495

Sanil James v. State of Kerala & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 496

XXX v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 497

Suo Motu v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 498

Abbas R.V. v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 499

The New India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Rajeswari & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 500

A.G. Dinesh v. KSEB Ltd. & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 501

Sadasivan & Anr. v. Sadasivan Nair & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 502

T. Sunil Kurera & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 503

Puthukkattu Pareekutty Aliyar v. State of Kerala & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 504

Central University Kerala & Anr. v. Joshila J.U. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 505

State of Kerala v. R. Baji 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 506

Secretary to Advocate General & Ors. v. State Information Commissioner & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 507

Judgments/Orders 

Writ Plea Alleging Violation Of Rights Conferred Under Industrial Settlement Maintainable U/Art 226 Only If Traceable To Common Law: Kerala High Court

Kerala High Court Directs State To Set Up Temporary Detention Centres For Foreign Citizens Without Travel Documents Within 2 Months

Case Title: Olorumemi Benjamin Baba Femi v. Union of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 391

The Kerala High Court on Monday directed the State Authorities and Secretary, Social Justice Department, to set up temporary detention centres for foreign citizens who do not possess travel documents within a period of two months. Justice Ziyad Rahman A A further clarified that the setting up of the detention centres must be done in conformity with the stipulations given by the Central Government.

Kerala Building Tax Act | Residential Building Rented Out For Residential Purpose Can't Be Treated As Commercial Building: High Court

Case Title: P.K Shanmughan v. District Collector & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 392

The Kerala High Court on Friday ruled that a residential building which has been rented out for residential purposes cannot be treated as a commercial building under Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975.

Justice Shaji P. Chaly examined the definition of a residential building under the Act before concluding that giving out a residential building for rent does not change its characteristics to that of a commercial building.

Kerala High Court Directs Kochi Corporation, District Collector To Take Necessary Actions To Prevent Flooding Amid Heavy Rainfall

Case Title: Tresa K.J v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 393

The Kerala High Court on Monday, considering the reports of flooding in the city amid heavy rainfall this morning, directed the officers of the Disaster Management Authority and the Kochi Municipal Corporation to ensure that every ground level measure is taken and completed on a war-footing so that the severe rains that are expected will not cause deleterious consequences to the citizens in the next few days.

Justice Devan Ramachandran taking into consideration of the heavy rainfall warning for the next couple of days, opined that the situation must be kept under control and the authorities of the Corporation, Disaster Management Authorities must devote sufficient time and attention to the situation as it unfolds on an hour to hour basis.

Lawyer's Default Sufficient Cause To Condone Delay In The Absence Of Willful Negligence On Litigant's Part: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Rajesh Chandran v. M.R. Gopalakrishnan Nair & ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 394

The Kerala High Court recently observed that default on the part of the lawyer is a sufficient cause to condone the delay as long as there are no willful latches and negligence on the part of the petitioner.

Justice C.S. Dias added that the parties should not suffer for the inaction, omission or misdemeanour of his counsel while adjudicating on a petition filed for setting aside an order passed by Motor Vehicles Accidents Tribunal.

Kerala High Court Quashes Suspension Order Against College Professors Finding Their Suspension 'Premeditated'

Case Title: Gouri Dev S.B & Ors. v. University Grants Commission & Ors. and connected matters

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 395

The Kerala High Court recently quashed the suspension orders issued against certain Assistant Professors of the Sree Narayana Guru College finding that they were issued prior to the report of the Internal Complaints Committee against them.

Justice Devan Ramachandran quashed the suspension orders upon learning that their suspension was premeditated while refraining from commenting further on the same.

Procedure Under CrPC Can Be Used To Launch Prosecution For Offences U/S 7 Of Land Conservancy Act: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Vasanthan B. v. Sub Inspector of Police & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 396

The Kerala High Court on Monday held that the procedure contemplated under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) to initiate prosecution against an accused can be used for offences under Section 7 of the Kerala Land Conservancy Act.

Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A added that CrPC was applicable since the Act did not provide for a specific procedure for the same. The Judge opined that the fact that offences under Section 7 were made cognizable fortified this view.

Kerala High Court Lays Down Two Modes To Appoint Sole Arbitrator, Says Appointment Via Any Other Mode 'Ex Facie Bad'

Case Title: M/s Hedge Finance Pvt. Ltd v. Bijish Joseph

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 397

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday held that a sole arbitrator can only be appointed either by a High Court or by an express agreement in writing between the parties in dispute, in the post-2015 amendment era of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

Justice C.S. Dias also ruled that a sole arbitrator appointment through any other mode will be de jure ineligible to act as an arbitrator and that such an appointment will be ex facie bad and in contravention of the Act.

Kerala High Court Stays All Proceedings Against Minister Antony Raju In Evidence Tampering Case

Case Title: Adv. Antony Raju v. State Of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 398

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday stayed all the proceedings of the lower court pending against Transport Minister Antony Raju in the evidence tampering case for a period of one month.

While admitting the plea, Justice Ziyad Rahman A A observed that the offences alleged against the petitioner could only be prosecuted on the basis of a complaint by the concerned court or an authorised officer, and not by the police. Therefore, the Court found that the Minister made a prima facie case in his favour.

Public Can Lodge Complaints Against Traffic Cops Found Using Mobile Phones On Duty: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Aboobacker K.A & Ors. v. Joint Regional Transport Officer & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 399

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday directed the Police Commissioner of Kochi to take action against traffic police officers who were found using mobile phones while on duty.

Justice Amt Rawal also added that anyone who finds an officer using mobile phones except for emergency or official calls can report the same to the toll-free numbers which will be notified soon.

Maternity Benefit Act Applies To Any Establishment As Defined Under Any Law In Force In State ; Applicable To Contract Employees : Kerala High Court

Case Title: Centre for Professional and Advanced Studies v. Abhitha Karun & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 400

The Kerala High Court recently ruled that female officers appointed on a contract basis are entitled to the benefit of the Maternity Benefit Act. The Court further ruled that the term 'establishment' under the Act can be any establishment within the meaning of any law that is in force in the State in relation to establishments.

Upon examining the relevant provisions and precedents, the Division Bench of Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S Sudha also concluded that the Special Rules of a registered society cannot override the provisions of the Act, which is a Central Act.

Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules| Can't Insist On Submission Of Scheme Of Mining Before Expiry Of Approved Mining Plan: High Court

Case Title: Sahara Granites v. District Geologist and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 401

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday held that the Scheme of Mining only ought to be submitted 120 days before the expiry of the first five-year period for which the Mining Plan was approved on the last occasion as per Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015.

Justice N. Nagaresh observed that when the language of Rule 66 is clear, there is no necessity to import the definition of the term 'year' from the Mineral Conservation and Development Rules, which has no application to minor minerals.

Kerala High Court Dismisses PIL Filed Against Conferring IPS Cadre To Retired Police Superintendent With Alleged Criminal Background

Case Title: G. Vipinan v. Union of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 402

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday dismissed the Public Interest Litigation challenging the steps taken to confer Indian Police Service (IPS), Kerala Cadre to Abdul Rasheed, retired Superintendent of Police, without considering his alleged criminal background.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly observed that the petition did not stand at this stage after UPSC pointed out that the selection process for the cadre was not complete yet.

Kerala High Court Directs District Collector To Monitor Upcoming Annual Festival At Sabarimala Amid Orange Alert

Case Title: Suo Motu v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 403

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday directed the Pathanamthitta District Collector to monitor the upcoming Niraputhari festival scheduled to be held tomorrow at Sabarimala in the wake of the orange alert issued in the district amid heavy downpour.

A Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice P.G. Ajithkumar also ordered that in case of any exigencies, appropriate decisions shall be taken by the District Disaster Management Authority, including restrictions on entry of pilgrims.

Illegal Permanent Flag Masts Put Up By Political Parties, Unions Attract Nothing But A Blind Eye': Kerala HC Seeks State Response

Case Title: Mannam Sugar Mills Corporative Ltd v. Deputy Superintendent of Police

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 404

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday asked the State to explain how and in what manner it planned to deal with the existing permanent flag masts on various roads and public spaces, mostly erected by vested interests.

While seeking suggestions from competent authorities on how to regulate and remove such installations, Justice Devan Ramachandran criticised the political parties and unions for putting up permanent flag masts in public places without permission.

Dowry Death | S.113B Of Evidence Act Casts A Reverse Burden On Accused To Disprove Prosecution Case: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Ajayakumar & Anr. v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 405

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday held that in dowry death cases, Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act casts a reverse burden on the accused to disprove the prosecution case. It added that if he fails to rebut the presumption under Section 113B, the court is bound to act on it.

Justice A. Badharudeen ruled that the standard of proof in cases involving reverse burden was on the basis of `preponderance of probabilities' while for the prosecution it was 'beyond all reasonable doubt'.

'Cruelty' & 'Abetment To Suicide' Independent Offences; Accused Being Guilty Of Former Doesn't Imply He's Automatically Guilty Of Latter: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Ajayakumar & Anr. v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 405

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday held that merely because an accused is found guilty under Section 498A of the IPC (cruelty), does not imply that he must also be held guilty of abetting his wife's suicide under Section 306 IPC.

Justice A. Badharudeen emphasised that Sections 498A (cruelty) and 306 IPC (abetment to suicide) are independent and constitute different offences.

Kerala High Court Prohibits Registry From Accepting Petitions With Vernacular Documents Unless Accompanied By English Translation

Case Title: K.M Mohammed Kutty v. State Transport Commissioner & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 406

The Kerala High Court recently held that advocates filing writ petitions should produce the English translation of documents which are filed in a local or vernacular language while prohibiting its Registry from accepting petitions without such translation.

Justice Amit Rawal was adjudicating upon a petition filed with vernacular documents and a note by the advocate saying that the English translation will be produced as and when required by the Court. The Judge pointed out that there is no provision in the High Court Rules empowering an advocate to attach such a note in a petition.

Kerala High Court Directs Registry To Accept Counter Affidavit Without Insisting On Its English Translation

Case Title: Aboobacker v. Valanchery Municipality and Others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 407

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday directed the Registry to accept a counter affidavit in a case without insisting on an English translation of the same.

This direction assumes significance since less than a month ago, another Bench of the Court had prohibited the Registry from accepting writ petitions with vernacular documents if not accompanied by an English translation.

Judge's Prerogative To Dispense With English Translations: Kerala High Court Clarifies Earlier Order

Case Title: K.M Mohammed Kutty v. State Transport Commissioner & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 408

Clarifying its earlier order mandating the filing of English Translation of all Malayalam documents, a single bench of the Kerala High Court on Thursday clarified that it is the prerogative of a judge to dispense with that requirement on a prayer to that effect being made.

Justice Amit Rawal passed the clarification order in an interlocutory application moved by Kerala High Court Advocates Association (KHCAA) seeking clarification on the Court's earlier order prohibiting the Registry from entertaining petitions without the English translation along with the paper books.

'With Proper Resolve Citizens Can Be Spared Of Unnecessary Inundation Every Year': Kerala HC Directs Authorities To Periodically Clean Drains

Case Title: Tresa K.J v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 409

The Kerala High Court on Thursday issued directions to various competent authorities to clear up the drainage system and canals to prevent inundation of the city. The Court further directed the Cochin Corporation and the Police to ensure that waste is not being dumped in the drains while ordering that if any person found violating these orders shall be dealt with under the full warrant of law.

Justice Devan Ramachandran, while enjoining the Cochin Corporation to keep the drainage system clean by periodically cleaning it and not by an annual exercise alone, observed that with proper resolve, the citizens can be spared of the unnecessary inundation every year.

Failure To Secure Presence Of Crucial Witnesses Not Ground To Acquit Accused If Evidence Otherwise Establishes Prosecution Case: Kerala HC

Case Title: Saju v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 410

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday held that the non-examination of crucial witnesses or the investigating officer by itself is not a sufficient reason to disbelieve the prosecution case in toto and to acquit the accused if the evidence adduced otherwise emphatically established the prosecution case.

Justice A. Badharudeen added that although the prosecution is duty bound to examine all material witnesses to prove its case, if their presence could not be secured due to valid reasons, their non-examination may be exempted.

Order Cancelling Maintenance U/S 127 CrPC Cannot Operate Retrospectively: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Jumaila Beevi v. A. Nissar

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 411

The Kerala High Court on Monday ruled that an order of cancellation of maintenance under Section 127(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) always operates prospectively and not retrospectively.

A Division Bench of Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Sophy Thomas added that such cancellation orders cannot date back to the date of application and will operate only from the date the maintenance was cancelled.

Conditions Set By CBFC For Theatrical Release Of Movie Also Applicable To OTT Release: Kerala High Court On Prithviraj-Starrer 'Kaduva'

Case Title: Jose Kuruvinakkunnel @ Kuruvinakkunnel Kuruvachan v Union of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 412

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday held that the conditions set by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) for the theatrical release of a movie should be followed when it is broadcasted on OTT platforms as well.

While adjudicating upon a plea seeing to block the OTT release of the Prithviraj-starrer Malayalam movie 'Kaduva', Justice V.G Arun observed that when the CBFC has already issued directions for a movie, they should be followed even if the OTT rights have been sold.

Kerala High Court Grants 10 More Days For NEET-UG Aspirants To Opt For NRI Quota

Case Title: Fathima S & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LIiveLaw(Ker) 413

The Kerala High Court on Thursday directed the competent authority to keep the online portal for MBBS Admission for the academic year 2022-23 open for a period of 10 more days for those candidates who intend to opt for the NRI quota.

Justice Devan Ramachandran observed that since the results of the NEET examinations have not yet been published and candidates were still allowed to opt for other or additional subjects, students who desire to opt for the NRI quota should not be withheld from doing so.

Dowry Death | Presumption U/S 113B Evidence Act Mandatory: Kerala High Court Reopens Case After It Was Closed As Suicide

Case Title: Baby S v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 414

The Kerala High Court on Friday directed a dowry death case to be reopened after the Sub Inspector (SI) of Police in charge of the investigation closed it as a case of suicide.

Justice Kauser Edappagath observed that as per Section 113 B of the Indian Evidence Act (presumption as to dowry death) if it is seen that a woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment for dowry by the accused soon before her death, the mandatory presumption is that such person caused the dowry death.

Kerala Municipality Act | No Property Tax Exemption U/S 235 For Building Given On Rent Merely Because Rent Is Utilised For Charity: High Court

Case Title: Panayppilly Sree Narayana Guruswami Trust v. Corporation of Kochi & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 415

The Kerala High Court recently ruled that a building given on rent will not be exempted from property tax under Section 235 of the Kerala Municipality Act merely because the rent received is utilised for charity purposes.

Upon going through the provision, Justice Shaji P. Chaly observed that property tax exemptions only applied to buildings utilised for the specified proposes while emphasising that what is exempted thereunder was the building and not the rent received to the building, even if it was utilised for charity.

Government Order Cannot Have Retrospective Operation Particularly When It's Not A Legislation: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Linson Thomas v. State of Kerala and Others.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 416

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday held that the retrospective operation of a Government Order cannot be permitted particularly when it is merely an executive order, and not a legislation.

Justice Devan Ramachandran observed that the petitioner joined the University unaware of any conditions as put forth by the subsequent Government order; therefore, the retrospective operation of the order cannot be permitted.

Kerala High Court Temporarily Bars Self-Financing Colleges From Taking Action Against BPL Students For Non Payment Of Fee

Case Title: Nimal James & Ors v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 417

The Kerala High Court on Monday temporarily refrained self-financing colleges from taking any form of detrimental action against students belonging to the Below Poverty Line (BPL) category merely for not paying the college fee. The students in the BPL category were recently stripped of the scholarship scheme that was previously available to them.

Justice Devan Ramachandran further clarified that this direction was not confined o the petitioners alone but to every student falling under the BPL category.

'We Can Neither Wait For Another Victim Nor Can We Let Roads Be Killing Fields': Kerala HC Directs NHAI To Fix Roads Within A Week

Case Title: C.P Ajithkumar & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 418

The Kerala High Court on Monday directed the National Highway Authority of India to take immediate steps to rectify every road under their control without any further delay within one week from today.

Justice Devan Ramachandran observed that steps should be taken to remove the potholes and craters on the road irrespective of whether that be on the National Highway, PWD Roads, or any other road under the control of the various Local Self Government Institutions.

Locus Standi To Be Satisfied To Make A Claim On Doctrine Of Legitimate Expectation: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan v. Elna Chinchu

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 419

The Kerala High Court recently observed that a person who bases his claim on the doctrine of legitimate expectation must first satisfy that there is a foundation for the same and thus has a locus standi to make such a claim.

A Division Bench of Justice P. B. Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S. Sudha observed that for a beneficiary to have a legitimate expectation on invoking the privilege granted, it must be proved that the beneficiary has the locus standi to make such a claim.

Convenience Of Wife Must Be Looked Into While Transferring Proceedings In Matrimonial Disputes: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Jincy K v. Vivek M.P

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 420

The Kerala High Court recently allowed a Transfer Petition observing that it is the convenience of the woman and children that has to be looked into while ordering the transfer of a case from one Court to another in matrimonial cases.

Justice C. S. Dias concluded so after referring to the Apex Court decisions regarding the transfer of matrimonial proceedings.

Kerala High Court Dismisses Saritha Nair's Plea Seeking Copies Of Swapna Suresh's 164 Statement

Case Title: Saritha S. Nair v. Union of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 421

The Kerala High Court on Thursday dismissed the plea moved by Saritha S. Nair, the prime accused in the infamous solar panel scam seeking a direction to provide her with copies of the Section 164 statement given by Swapna Suresh, an accused in the diplomatic gold smuggling case.

Justice Kauser Edappagath dismissed the petition finding that the apprehensions projected by Nair were not substantiated sufficiently and therefore 'speculative'.

Vlogger's Suicide | 'Custodial Interrogation Necessary To Elicit Truth': Kerala High Court Denies Pre-Arrest Bail To Husband

Case Title: Mahanas Moidu v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 422

The Kerala High Court on Thursday denied anticipatory bail to the husband of a young vlogger Rifa Mehnaz, who was found dead in her house in Dubai earlier this year under mysterious circumstances.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas dismissed the application for pre-arrest bail finding that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner was essential to elicit the truth surrounding his wife's death.

Statement U/S 164 CrPC Is A Public Document, But Third Party Has To Establish Direct Interest To Get A Copy: Kerala High Court In Saritha's Plea

Case Title: Saritha S. Nair v. Union of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 421

In a significant decision, the Kerala High Court on Thursday held that a statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is a public document falling under Section 74(1)(iii) of the Indian Evidence Act since it is the record of an act of a public officer done in the discharge of his duty.

However, Justice Kauser Edappagath also clarified that no person is entitled to a copy of the 164 statement until the final report in the case has been filed and cognizance is taken in the matter. The Judge emphasised that in the case of a stranger seeking such copies, they are bound to furnish genuine and tangible interest in the document.

Assessee Has Statutory Right To File An Appeal Even After Voluntary Payment Of GST/Penalty: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Hindustan Steel and Cement Versus Assistant State Tax Officer

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 423

The Kerala High Court has held that assessees have a statutory right to file an appeal even after the voluntary payment of GST or penalty.

The single bench of Justice Gopinath has observed that the culmination of proceedings in respect of a person who seeks to make payment of tax and penalty under Section 129(1)(a) does not result in the generation of a summary of an order under Form DRC-07 and cannot result in the right of the person to file an appeal under Section 107 being deprived.

Child's Convenience To Be Given Preference While Transferring Petitions Filed For Custody: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Biny Kuriakose v. Joseph Sebastian & connected matters.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 424

The Kerala High Court has ruled that while transferring petitions filed for custody of children, the convenience of the child should be given preference particularly when the wife is abroad and appearing through a power of attorney.

Observing so, Justice C.S Dias transferred all the pending cases between a couple to the court near the permanent residence of their child.

Violation Of Bail Conditions By Itself Not A Ground To Cancel Bail: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Godson v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 425

The Kerala High Court on Thursday held that non-compliance with bail conditions alone is not a ground to cancel the bail already granted to the accused since such cancellation affects the personal liberty of a person under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Justice Ziyad Rahman A. A clarified that while considering an application to cancel the bail on the ground of non-compliance with the conditions, the court has to consider the question of whether the alleged violation amounts to an attempt to interfere with the administration of justice or as to whether it affects the trial of the case in which the accused is implicated.

Offending Officer Can Be Transferred In Case Of Indiscipline In Forces: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Divyamol R. S. v. The Director General and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 426

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday ruled that it is permissible to deal with indiscipline in disciplined forces by transferring the deviant officers.

A Division Bench of Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. added that such transfers would ensure that discipline is maintained within the force while simultaneously assuring that no aspersion is cast on the officer's character or conduct.

Sub Inspector Was Unaware Of 'Arnesh Kumar' Guidelines: Police Commissioner Submits Before Kerala High Court

Case Title: Gopika Jain & Anr v. Faisal M.A

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 427

An interesting development transpired in the Kerala High Court recently when a Commissioner of Police communicated in his statement to the Court that a Sub Inspector of Police was oblivious of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar.

A Division Bench of Justice Alexander Thomas and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen condemned the cavalier manner in which the Sub Inspector had responded to the contempt of court proceedings initiated against him for non-compliance with these guidelines.

Govt Which Claims To Be Progressive Can't Deny EWS Benefits To Non-Religious Persons: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Nirupama Padmakumar & Ors. v State of Kerala & Ors

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 428

The Kerala High Court on Friday directed the State to expeditiously frame a policy to issue community certificates to persons belonging to the non-religious category such that they can avail the benefits available to Economically Weaker Sections (EWS).

Justice V.G Arun also observed that a government which claims to be progressive cannot deny non-religious category persons the benefits merely because they choose not to belong to any community or caste.

Air Pollution A Silent Killer, Multi-Sectoral Challenge In India: Kerala High Court

Case Title: M/s Vodafone Idea Ltd v. Kerala State Pollution Control Board & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 429

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday emphasised the gravity of air pollution in the country and how it poses a multi-jurisdictional and multi-sectoral challenge for the Centre and the State alike.

Justice N. Nagaresh observed that air pollution is a silent killer that impacts public health as well as the national economy detrimentally.

Kerala High Court Denies Bail To LTTE Sympathizer Who Overstayed 5 Years In India Without Visa

Case Title: Ramesh v. Chief Investigation Officer & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 430

The Kerala High Court on Thursday denied bail to a suspected LTTE sympathizer for having overstayed in India without a Visa and actively plotting to procure prohibited arms and contraband articles while furthering the activities of LTTE in India and abroad.

A Division Bench of Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice C. Jayachandran dismissed the appeal finding that the witness statements clearly established that he was an active member of the banned terrorist organization 'Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam' (LTTE).

Kerala HC Gants Pre-Arrest Bail To A Doctor Accused Of Posting Defamatory Articles Against Lakshadweep Administrative Officers

Case title: Dr K P Hamsakoya vs Union Territory Of Lakshadweep [BAIL APPL. NO. 1464 OF 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 431

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday granted anticipatory bail to a senior doctor who has been accused of posting defamatory articles against officers of the Administration of Lakshadweep on Facebook.

The bench of Justice Viju Abraham was essentially dealing with the pre-arrest bail plea of Dr. K P Hamsakoya, who is one of the seniormost doctors serving the Lakshadweep Administration and that he is presently under suspension.

Reservations For Differently Abled Should Be Implemented In Aided School Appointments: Kerala High Court

Case Title: K.J. Varghese v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 432

The Kerala High Court recently held that the reservations earmarked for persons with disabilities should be enforced in educational institutions aided by the government during their recruitment process. The Court further held that appointments made post-2018 shall not be implemented unless such reservations were awarded.

While clarifying that approval of appointments already granted shall not be unsettled, Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. added that the right of reservation in employment conferred to the disabled under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act 1995 and the Rights of Persons With Disabilities Act 2016 cannot be taken away by placing stumbling blocks.

Kannur University Case| Kerala High Court Stays Appointment Of Priya Varghese As Associate Professor Till 31st August

Case Title: Dr Joseph Skariah v. Vice Chancellor (Selection Committee Chairman)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 446

The Kerala High Court on Monday stayed the appointment of Priya Varghese, wife of K.K. Ragesh, private secretary to Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan as an Associate Professor at the Department of Malayalam in Kannur University till August 31st.

Justice Devan Ramachandran has passed the interim order staying the appointment of Priya Varghese as an associate professor in a petition filed by the second rank holder in the list.

Kerala High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To BJP General Secretary Of Lakshadweep Accused Of Holding National Flag With 'Saffron Down'

Case Title: Mohammed Kasim H.K. v. Union Territory of Lakshadweep & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 447

The Kerala High Court on Friday granted anticipatory bail to the BJP State General Secretary of Lakshadweep accused of insulting the national flag by holding it with 'saffron down'. Mohammed Kasim HK had been booked under Section 2 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honours Act, 1971.

Justice Viju Abraham granted pre-arrest bail on noting that custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be necessary, considering the nature of allegations.

Court In Area Where Minor Ordinarily Resides Has Jurisdiction In Guardianship Case, Citizenship Of Child/ Parents Has No Bearing: Kerala High Court

James Robert Edward Peirce & Ors. v. Anna Mathew & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 457

The Kerala High Court recently held that an application with respect to the guardianship of a minor has to be made to the District Court having jurisdiction in the place where the "minor ordinarily resides".

A Division Bench consisting of Justice A Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Sophy Thomas observed that citizenship or domicile of the father of a child, or the fact that rightly or wrongly the child had acquired a foreign passport, will have no bearing in determining the jurisdiction.

Can't Deny Occupancy Certificate For Constructions Granted Building Permit Prior To S.27A Kerala Conservation Of Paddy & Wet Land Act: High Court

Case Title: Usha Rajan v. Tripunithura Municipality & Ors. and S. Umesh Shenoy v. Tripunithura Municipality & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 458

The Kerala High Court recently, while disposing of two Writ Petitions, held that an Occupancy Certificate cannot be denied on the ground that the land where the building is constructed is a paddy land or wetland in respect of a building which was constructed as per a valid building permit issued prior to the coming into force of the amended provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland 2008 Act (30.12.2017).

Justice N. Nagaresh observed that when an application for an Occupancy Certificate in respect of a building which was constructed as per a valid building permit issued prior to 30.12.2017 is made, the Authorities cannot take umbrage under Section 14 to deny an Occupancy Certificate to the building on the ground that the land where the construction was made is a paddy land or wetland.

Whether Subordinate Judges' Courts Have Jurisdiction To Grant Leave, Try & Dispose Of Suit Filed U/S 92 CPC? Kerala HC Refers Issue To Larger Bench

Case Title: Pathanapuram Taluk Samajam & Ors. v. K.K. Surendran & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 459

Recently, the Kerala High Court expressed its doubt as to the validity of an earlier Single Judge decision in Sree Gurudeva Charitable and Educational Trust, Kayamkulam & Others v. K. Gopalakrishnan & Others, which had held that it was only the Principal District Judge which had the jurisdiction to grant leave for institution of a suit under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).

On noting that the above decision does not lay down the correct position of law, Justice C.S. Dias was of the considered view that the question regarding whether the Court of the Subordinate Judge is competent to grant leave to institute a suit and, thereafter, to try and dispose of the suit under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908, was to be decided by a Bench of two or more Judges, and thus, directed the Registry to place the same before the Chief Justice who may take the appropriate decision in this regard if deemed necessary.

NMC Direction For Govt Fee In 50% Seats Won't Apply To Private Medical Colleges & Deemed Universities In Kerala : High Court

Case Title: Fathima Thazkiya O v. National Medical Commission and Connected Cases

Citation:2022 LiveLaw(Ker)460

The Kerala High Court recently held that the direction issued by the National Medical Commission(NMC) that the fee in 50% of seats in Private Medical Colleges and Deemed Universities should be at par with the fees in Government medical colleges will not apply in the State of Kerala.

The Court held so taking note of the fact that there is no concept of "Government Quota" or "Management Quota" in private medical colleges in Kerala and that the fees of private medical colleges are fixed by a statutory body, Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee(AFRC).

Experience Cannot Substitute Duration Of Service Required By UGC Norms: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Dr. C.S. Rajan v. The Registrar, Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 461

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday observed that when the UGC norms mandate 8 years of continuous service in the post of 'Reader' in order to be eligible for promotion as 'Professor', then the experience gained by a person in a post which had been gained by him pursuant to an appointment which had hitherto been declared as 'illegal' by the Court would not be sufficient to act as substitute in order to make the person eligible.

The Division Bench comprising of Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice Mary Joseph, in the review petition before it, observed that when there are norms stipulating the qualifications which have been laid down by the UGC and which are unambiguous, the Court could not substitute the same with its own interpretation to benefit a person.

No Legislative Competence To Amend KVAT Act After Introduction Of GST Act: Kerala High Court

Case Title: State Tax Officer & Anr Vs. Baiju A.A

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 462

The Kerala High Court has held that legislative competence to amend the Kerala Value Added Tax (KVAT) Act after the introduction of the GST Act is impermissible.

The division bench of S.V.Bhatti and Justice Basant Balaji has observed that the amendment made by the Finance Act of 2018 to the provisions of the erstwhile KVAT Act to enable the department to initiate assessment proceedings in respect of assessments pending as of March 31, 2018 was illegal because the KVAT Act has already been repealed.

Youngsters Avoiding Marriage To "Enjoy Free Life", Live-In Relationships On Rise : Kerala High Court

Case Title: xxxx v. xxxx

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 463

In a recent judgment, the Kerala High Court expressed concerns that the consumerist culture of 'use and throw' has affected matrimonial relationships. The Court lamented that the younger generation is seeing marraige as an "evil", which has to be avoided to "enjoy free life" and that live-in relationships are on the rise.

Remarking upon the sanctity that the institution of marriage has been attributed with, the Division Bench composed of Justice A. Muhammed Mustaque and Justice Sophy Thomas, observed, "Kerala, known as God's own Country, was once famous for its well knit family bondage. But the present trend it seems to break the nuptial tie on flimsy or selfish reasons, or for extra-marital relationships, even unmindful of their children. The wails and screams coming out of disturbed and destroyed families are liable to shake the conscience of the society as a whole. When warring couples, deserted children and desperate divorcees occupy the majority of our population, no doubt it will adversely affect the tranquility of our social life, and our society will have a stunted growth".

"Sexually Provocative Dress" Remark : Kerala High Court Dismisses Sessions Judge's Plea Challenging Transfer

Case Title: S. Krishnakumar v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 464

The Kerala High Court on Thursday dismissed the plea moved by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kozhikode, challenging his transfer order to the post of Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Kollam. The transfer was made after the judge made the controversial "sexually provocative dress" remark in the order granting bail to Civic Chandran in a sexual harasssment case.

The bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman observed that the petitioner, who is a member of higher judicial service, cannot be said to be prejudiced in any manner for his posting as Presiding Officer of Labour Court, which is a post born from the cadre of District Judge. "I fail to see what legal right of the petitioner is infringed by the transfer order and I am of the opinion that the grounds raised in the writ petition do not justify the grant of any plea sought for", Justice Anu Sivaraman read out the operative portion of the order.

Kerala High Court Directs KSRTC To Look Into Anomalies In Pay Scale Between Senior & Juniors Promoted To Same Post

Case Title: Sudheer Ram S. & Ors. v. KSRTC & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 465

The Kerala High Court recently observed that where there is an anomaly between the pay scale drawn by a senior and a junior in service, particularly when both had been promoted to the same post, albeit from different levels, the competent authority would have to engage its mind as to the circumstances up to the same.

Justice Devan Ramachandran made the observation while dealing with a case in which KSRTC employees who had been promoted to the post of Superintendent from that of Upper Division Clerk (Selection Grade) were drawing less salary when compared to another employee who had been promoted to the same post from the post of Special Assistant/Senior Assistant.

Kerala High Court Directs To Grant Police Protection To Adani Ports For Completion Of Vizhinjam Project

Case Title: Howe Engineering Projects (I) Pvt. Ltd. & 3 Ors. v. State of Kerala & 27 Ors. and M/S Adani Vizhinjam Port Pvt Ltd & 2 Ors v. State of Kerala & 27 Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw Ker 466

The Kerala High Court on Thursday allowed the petition for police protection to the employees and workmen of M/S Adani Vizhinjam Port Pvt Ltd., and its contracting company, Howe Engineering Construction, and also for free ingress and egress to the construction site.

Justice Anu Sivaraman while allowing the petition, observed that there is "no doubt in my mind that the right to agitate or protest against any matter including the apathy or neglect of the Government cannot confer any right either on respondents 11 to 25 or any of the protesters to contend that they have a right to obstruct the activities which have due permissions or to trespass into the project site and cause damage to public property".

Trials Ought To Be Heard Based On Date Of Incarceration To Avoid Long Detention Of Under-Trial Prisoners: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Jahir Hussain v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 467

The Kerala High Court recently, while acquitting a murder convict and reversing the order of the trial court, highlighted the need for a speedy trial and proper assistance to prisoners for filing appeals to avoid the long periods of incarceration.

Division Bench consisting of Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice C Jayachandran, pointing out the distressing aspect of the continued incarceration of under-trial prisoners and the delay occasioned in conducting trials, opined that High Court could issue directions to Trial Courts to take up matter based on the date of incarceration of convicts.

Mere Facebook Photos Don't Show Personal Friendship, 'Degree Of Relationship' Relevant To Determine Reasonableness Of Apprehension Of Bias: Kerala HC

Case Title: Manager, Malankara Syrian Catholic Colleges & Ors v. Dr Reshmi P.R. & Ors and other connected cases

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 468

The Kerala High Court recently observed that where reasonable likelihood of 'bias' in a selection process is alleged on the ground of relationship, the degree of closeness or 'nearness' of the relationship between the parties ought to be 'so great' as to give a reasonable apprehension of bias.

The Division Bench composed of Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S. Sudha while observing so, held that in the instant case, a mere relationship between the candidate selected (9th respondent) and a member of the Selection Committee (8th respondent), would not be sufficient to assume bias.

State Expected To Adhere To Rule Of Law: Kerala High Court Quashes Appointment Of Marketfed MD

Case Title: A. Krishnan v. The Kerala State Co-operative Marking Federation Ltd

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 469

The Kerala High Court on Thursday quashed the appointment of S. K Sanil as the Managing Director of MARKETFED (Kerala State Co-operative Marketing Federation Limited).

A Division Bench consisting of Justice A. K. Jayashankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. found Sanil to be ineligible and unqualified to hold the post, citing that he was not an officer in the IAS cadre in the senior time-scale at the relevant point in time. "The State Executive is expected to adhere to the rule of law and set an example in matters of statutory compliance by adhering to its Constitutional role as a 'State' within the meaning of the term under Article 12 of the Constitution of India...we caution the State and the MARKETFED against resorting to such exercises in future."

No One Would Level False Rape Allegations In Conservative, Non-Permissive Society Like India: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Shaju@Shaju v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 470

While reiterating the settled law on conviction based on sole testimony of prosecutrix in a rape case, the Kerala High Court on Thursday observed, "In the conservative, tradition bound, non-permissive society like that of ours, none would make a false accusation of rape; braving ostracism, loss of face, social stigma and shame." The remarks were made while contrasting the Indian law relating to sexual assault trials as against the laws and practices prevalent in the UK. In R v. Neville Benson Henry & R. v Jeffrey Patrick Manning, an English Court of Appeals had held that conviction on the evidence of the woman or girl alone would be dangerous due to the possibility of false stories being foisted. To the contrary, the Indian Supreme Court in Bharwada Bhoginbhai Hirjibhai v. State of Gujarat, had remarked that in the Indian setting, refusal to act on the testimony of a sexual assault victim in the absence of corroboration as a rule would add "insult" to her injuries.

In this light, the Division Bench comprising Justices K. Vinod Chandran and C. Jayachandran observed, "Though at first blush the law set forth in both United Kingdom and India are the same, there is a semantic difference in so far as the rule and the exception; which is a subtle reflection of the societal conditions in the two Countries".

Whether Grievance In Complaint Can Be Entertained By Lokayukta Depends On Case To Case Basis, No Law Can Be Laid By Court: Kerala HC

Case Title: General Convenor, Kerala State School Kalolsavam, 2017-2018 & Anr v. Arundhathi Krishna J. & Anr., and connected cases

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 471

The Kerala High Court recently held that any question as to whether the Lok Ayukta or Upa Lok Ayukta can entertain any complaint regarding any grievance or allegation, would have to be ascertained according to the factual circumstances, and on a case to case basis and no law can be laid down by the Court in this regard.

The Division Bench comprising of Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly further directed the authorities under various statues such as Upa Lok Ayukta, Human Rights Commission, Juvenile Justice Board, Civil Courts etc., to take note of and abide by the directions issued by the same court in another case W. P. (C) No. 18950 of 2018, while dealing with any complaints as to grievance or allegation in respect of the participation of students in cultural or other events at District or State Levels.

SC/ST Act - Anticipatory Bail Application Can Only Be Filed Before The Special Court, Not High Court: Kerala HC

Case Title: K. M Basheer v. Rajani K.T & Ors and Connected cases

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 472

The Kerala High Court on Friday held that in cases of alleged offences under the SC/ST Act, an application for anticipatory bail can be filed only before the Special Court or the Exclusive Special Court constituted under the Act and not before the High Court.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas further clarified that High Court has neither concurrent jurisdiction under section 438 CrPC nor original jurisdiction under section 482 Cr.P.C. for grating bail for offences under SC/ST Act and can only exercise appellate jurisdiction under Section 14A.

Evidence To Be Liberally Construed In Benevolent Legislations: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Abdul Majeed & Anr v. P.V. Prajosh & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 473

The Kerala High Court recently held that in the case of benevolent legislations, such as the Motor Vehicles Act, evidence must be evaluated in a liberal manner, without insisting on an extreme form of 'preponderance of probabilities and possibilities'.

"It is the trite law that 'preponderance of probabilities and possibilities' is the rule of evidence to be applied while querying proof of allegations involved in civil cases. When coming to benevolent legislations, the rule of evidence is nothing but 'preponderance of probabilities and possibilities' and in such cases, the evidence shall be evaluated in a liberal manner without insisting for the extreme form of 'preponderance of probabilities and possibilities'", the Court observed.

In this light, Justice A. Badharudeen observed that when a person who had been working as a cleaner in a lorry died, it wouldn't always be possible to adduce documentary evidence to prove his job as a cleaner, and in such circumstances, the available evidence ought to be liberally construed.

Kerala Education Rules | Teachers Working On Leave Vacancy Do Not Have Preferential Right Of Appointment To Permanent Vacancy: High Court

Case Title: Sreejith T. v. The Manager, A.M. Upper Primary School & Ors, and Asha P. Vasudevan v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 474

The Kerala High Court on Friday held that regularization of appointments made in leave vacancies, in preference to their juniors, could be only be availed by teachers who had been 'relieved' as per Rule 49 or Rule 52 or on account of termination of vacancies and later accommodated in leave vacancies, in terms of Rule 52 of the Kerala Education Rules.

The Division Bench comprised of Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S. Sudha while observing so, further went on to hold that when a person, who had been appointed on there having arisen a leave vacancy, and thereafter was permitted to continue without break during the extended period of leave, there would not have arisen any occasion for such a person to be 'relieved'. In such a scenario, he/she could not be said to be a 'claimant' in terms of Rule 51A of Chapter XIVA of the Rules, and thus would not have any preferential right of appointment, either.

Owners & Manufacturers Liable For Illegal Modification Of Vehicles; Not Shopkeepers: Kerala High Court Opines Prima Facie

Case Title: Abdul Sathar & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 475

The Kerala High Court recently held that as per the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, the liability for alteration of vehicles is on the owner or manufacturer of the vehicle and not on the shopkeeper.

Justice Amit Rawal, while holding so, observed that in the instant case, the notices issued by the Road Transport Office, Alappuzha, to the petitioner-shopkeepers were without jurisdiction, and hence, the Court could exercise its writ jurisdiction over the same.

Public Sector Banks Can Seek Look Out Circulars Against Defaulters Only If Detrimental To Economic Interest Of India: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Shinas A. Firdaus v. Union of India & Ors and D. Pradeep Kumar v. Union of Indian & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 476

The Kerala High Court recently held that the public sector banks can request for opening of Look Out Certificates (LOC) against defaulting account holders, only if the departure of the defaulter would be detrimental to the economic interest of India or it would not be in the larger public interest.

Justice V.G. Arun, while holding so, went on to observe that the Office Memorandums (OMs) do not empower the banks to originate Look Out Circulars, infringing the petitioner's liberty, as long as their movement to the foreign country is not detrimental to the economic interest of India or is against the larger public interest. "The expressions 'economic interest of India' and 'larger public interest' will not take in violations of commercial contracts between a bank and its customer. Such an interpretation will result in liberty being sacrificed to safeguard the commercial interest of banking institutions. There cannot be such a constructed interpretation of the dynamic concept of 'liberty' enunciated and guaranteed by the Constitution of India", it was observed.

Bail Can't Be Denied By Ignoring Basic Tenets Of Criminal Jurisprudence Merely Because Accused Was Earlier Released On Bail By Incompetent Court: Kerala HC

Case Title: Arun v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(ker) 477

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday granted bail to a man accused of smothering and electrocuting his wife to death with an observation that merely because he was earlier released on bail by a court of incompetent jurisdiction would not be a reason keep him in custody, ignoring the basic tenets of criminal jurisprudence that an accused is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty.

"The process and the manner in which the petitioner was granted bail initially, though certainly perverse and against law, the basic principles of grant of bail in a criminal trial cannot be ignored, despite the above illegality brought about by a wrong order," Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas observed.

Kerala Education Rules | Teacher Re-Appointed In Lower Category After Retrenchment Not Entitled To Pay Akin To Previous Post: Kerala HC

Case Title: Baby Letha K. v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 478

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday, observed that a teacher who is relieved on account of reduction in the number of posts and re-appointed in a lower category would not be entitled to claim the pay and allowances applicable to the higher category in which he/she was earlier working.

The Division Bench comprising of Justice P.B. Sureshkumar and Justice C.S. Sudha, while rejecting the contention of the appellant that she was entitled to the pay and allowances applicable to the Headmistress, for the period during which she was working as Lower Primary School Teacher on her re-appointment in another school as LP School teacher, further observed, "...Rule is intended only for granting pay protection to retrenched teachers on re-appointment in the same cadre and the same scale of pay and it does not enable a teacher who is relieved on account of reduction in the number of posts and re-appointed in a lower category to claim the pay and allowances applicable to the higher category in which he/she was earlier working".

Property Dispute Between Mother & Child Does Not Fall Under Explanation (c) To S.7(1) Family Courts Act, Civil Court Jurisdiction Not Barred: Kerala HC

Case Title: Brinda & Ors v. Muktha K.N.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 479

The Kerala High Court recently held that in order to attract Clause (c) of explanation to Section 7(1) of the Family Courts Act, it must be satisfied that a suit or proceedings for an order or injunction should be in circumstances "arising out of a marital relationship", and the dispute should be one with respect to the properties of such 'parties to marriage'. The provision states that a Family Court shall exercise jurisdiction in respect of suits and proceedings between the parties to a marriage with respect to the property of the parties or of either of them.

Thus, Justice MR Anitha held that a property dispute between a mother and her children cannot be included under Clause (c) of explanation to Section 7(1) of the Family Courts Act, for it is a civil dispute and does not involve any questions regarding the marital status or validity of marriage and as a consequence, it cannot be said that jurisdiction of Civil Courts is barred in case of such dispute between a mother and child.

Transplantation Of Human Organs & Tissues Act No Bar To Enquiry For Professional Misconduct Under IMC Ethics Regulations 2002

Case Title: Dr. Mathew Jacob & Ors v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 480

The Kerala High Court recently considered the question of whether an authority under the Indian Medical Council (Professional conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002 is empowered to issue notice and conduct enquiry on a complaint regarding alleged misconduct in transplantation of human organs, since the latter is governed by the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994, and answered the question in the affirmative.

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly observed that the Indian Medical Council (Professional conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002 (hereinafter, Ethics Regulations 2002) is a self contained code since it clearly specifies the procedure and manner in which disciplinary action has to be proceeded with, and no bar to this authority could be found in the provisions of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994 (hereinafter THOTA 1994), either when there is any professional misconduct, or to conduct an enquiry on a complaint received in this regard.

Assistant Prof Appointment | Teaching Experience & Research Aptitude Relevant Only For Shortlisting Candidates; Selection To Be Based On Interview: Kerala HC

Case Title: Dr Smitha Chacko v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 481

The Kerala High Court recently set aside an order issued by the Mahatma Gandhi University in October 2021 for appointment of assistant professors, insofar as it relates to teaching and research aptitude as interview selection criteria.

A division bench consisting of Justice P.S Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S. Sudha observed that the University Order is contrary to UGC Regulations on Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and Other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and Measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education, 2018.

Proceedings U/S 240 CrPC Culminate In An Order "Framing Charge" Only After Plea Of Accused Is Taken: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Renjith Pannackal v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 482

The Kerala High Court recently held that proceedings under Section 240 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) culminate in an order framing charge only after the plea of the accused is taken as per sub-section (2) of Section 240 of the Code.

While holding so, Justice K. Babu went on to observe that, "If Section 240 Cr.PC is interpreted in such a manner that even before taking the plea of the accused there is an order framing charge, it will defeat the very purpose of sub-section (2) of Section 240 Cr.PC".

Ex-Parte Orders Passed Without Issuance Of Notice Cannot Be Brought Within Purview Of S.36 CPC For Execution: Kerala High Court

Case Title: G. M. Sheik & Ors. v. M/s Raja Biri Private Ltd & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 483

The Kerala High Court recently observed that an order passed without issuing notice to the opposite party cannot be brought under the purview of Section 36 CPC and it cannot be executed through court until the same is merged in a subsequent order after notice to the opposite party.

Justice P. Somarajan observed that in cases where the ex parte order has been passed without issuing notice to the opposite party, including an order passed under the proviso attached to Rule 3 of Order XXXIX CPC, will not have any binding force on the opposite party, since it is deprived of "audio alteram partem" (right to be heard) which is a fundamental requirement for making the order binding on the parties. Furthermore, the only exception to this fundamental principle is with respect to administrative matter when there is no occasion for causing prejudice to the opposite party, and also in the exercise of legislative authority.

If Respondent Does Not Avail Benefit Of Order 41 Rule 22 CPC In Appeal, Courts Not Obliged To Examine Correctness Of Finding In Review: Kerala HC

Case Title: Charley Panthallookaran v. Joint Registrar (General) of Cooperative Societies & Ors

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 484

The Kerala High Court recently considered the ambit of Rule 22 of Order 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure and observed that where the respondent in an appeal does not choose to avail the benefit conferred by the said provision then it would not be obligatory for the Court to examine the correctness of the finding rendered in the impugned judgment in a review petition.

The Division Bench comprising of Justice P.B. Sureshkumar and Justice C.S. Sudha went on to observe that, ".... a contention of this nature which was available to a respondent at the time of hearing of the appeal ought to have been raised by him at that very instance itself. As such, according to us, it cannot be said that non-consideration of such a contention which was not raised by the party, is a ground to seek review of the judgment".

Kerala High Court Grants Bail To A Psychiatric Patient Citing That Further Detention In Jail Would Adversely Affect His Illness

Case Title: Vinson v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 485

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday granted bail to an accused, taking into consideration the fact that he is suffering from a psychotic illness and further detention in jail would adversely affect his illness.

Justice Kauser Edappagath observed that since the major part of the investigation is over and the petitioner, a psychiatric patient, has already spent more than three weeks in jail, further detention in jail would adversely affect his illness.

Where Doctrine of Desuetude Applies To A Statute, It Will Also Apply To Schemes Framed Under Such Statute: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Sujith Lal v. Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 486

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday observed that where the 'Doctrine of Desuetude' could find application in the case of statutes, there was no reason for the same not to apply to a scheme that had been framed under the provisions of that Statute.

Justice T.R. Ravi, while observing so, noted that relying upon the findings of the Apex Court in Monnet Ispat & Energy Ltd. v. Union of India, only two conditions had to be satisfied for the application of the doctrine of desuetude - whether the statute or legislation has not been in operation for a very considerable period, and whether the contrary practice has been followed over a period of time. "The only aspect to be looked into is whether the two conditions for the application of the doctrine are satisfied. Admittedly, even after 40 years, the road has not been widened to 18 metres width. At the same time, the reply received from the Public Works Department shows that at present the proposal that is being considered is widening the road to a width of 12 metres. It is also in evidence that the restriction for construction within 18 metres was not followed for the past 40 years and on the contrary, persons have been permitted to effect construction by applying the restriction to only 12 metres. Both the conditions for the application of the doctrine thus stand satisfied", it was observed.

Kerala High Court Upholds Life Sentence Of Beedi Tycoon Mohammed Nisham For Mowing Down Security Guard Chandrabose

Case Title: Mohammed Nisam A.A. v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 487

The Kerala High Court, on Friday, dismissed the appeal filed by beedi tycoon Mohammed Nisham against conviction and life sentence in the Chandrabose murder case.

Division Bench consisting of Justice K Vinod Chandran and C Jayachandran has upheld the life imprisonment awarded to the accused.

"...it is clear that the conscious act of running down a man to cause injuries, which injuries in the ordinary course would lead to death, makes the accused liable for murder. Ramming a man, deliberately with a vehicle, is also an act, imminently dangerous as to cause death, in all probability. Looking at the commission of the act, which cannot be termed to be an accident, it is murder, most foul and vicious, snuffing out the life of a poor soul".

Applications For Correction In Birth Certificate Can't Be Rejected Summarily, Registrar Must Consider Evidence Placed Before It: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Jeenamol Varghese v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 488

The Kerala High Court recently directed all the Registrars under the Municipality and Grama Panchayat to conduct an enquiry adhering to provisions under the Registrations of Birth and Deaths Act, 1969, while considering applications seeking correction of Birth Certificates, and not to reject such applications summarily.

Justice Amit Rawal made the direction upon noting instances where the Registrars, without adhering to the provisions of Section 15 and Rule 11 and other rules, are rejecting applications for the correction of birth records. "If any such application is made for correction or cancellation of entry in the records of Registrar, the Registrar is required to hold an enquiry...The Government Pleader is directed to circulate the order of this Court to all the Registrars under the Municipality and the Grama Panchayat to follow the procedure to prevent spate of litigations in this Court wherein the applications are being rejected summarily".

Kerala High Court Dismisses Pleas Against Unilateral Change In Distributorship Of LPG Cylinders By Oil Marketing Corporations

Case Title: Kasim P.H. v. Union of India & Ors., and other connected matters

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 489

The Kerala High Court on Thursday held that the transfer of consumers from one LPG distributor to another by Oil Marketing Corporations was in pursuance of the policy adopted in this regard, and the consumers had no right to challenge the same and contend that they are entitled to continue with the existing distributors.

The Division Bench comprising of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly, while holding so, observed, "...the guidelines and the agreement executed by and between the Oil Marketing Corporations and the distributors would show that the consumers are under the direct supervision and control of the Oil Marketing Corporations and the consumer cannot turn around and say that they are entitled to continue with the existing distributors".

Kerala Co-operative Societies Act | Employer Entitled To Continue Disciplinary Proceedings Even After Retirement Of Employee: High Court

Case Title: S. Yadava v. Kerala State Co-Operative Bank & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 490

The Kerala High Court on Friday held that under Rule 198 (7) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, the employer is entitled to continue disciplinary proceedings after retirement of employee, as well as withhold the retiral benefits until the culmination of such proceedings.

The Division Bench comprising Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P., while holding so, reasoned that, "If the argument that the proceedings cannot continue after the retirement is accepted, any delinquent employee can commit any fraud, misappropriation, grave dereliction of duty etc., on the eve of his retirement and can plead that he is beyond the reach of the employer, which would result in such delinquent employee escaping without punishment. Law cannot allow such a course and in all those cases larger public interest must be the guiding factor to decide the case".

Madhu Lynching Case| Kerala High Court Upholds Special Court Order Cancelling Bail To 11 Accused

Case Title: Marakkar & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Anr and connected cases

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 491

The Kerala High Court on Monday dismissed the appeals challenging a Special Court's order cancelling the bail granted to 11 accused persons in case of lynching of a tribal youth in February 2018.

Justice Kauser Edappagath confirmed the order cancelling bail of 11 of the accused persons by the Mannarkkad Special Court under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The bail granted to one of the accused was however upheld.

S.4 Partition Act | Dwelling House Includes Adjacent Building Necessary For Family's Convenient Occupation, Buy-Out Permitted Till Execution: Kerala HC

Case Title: Bhanumathi & Anr. v. K. Abdurahiman Haji & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 492

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday observed that although the term 'dwelling house' is not defined in the Partition Act, 1893 however, by way of judicial interpretation, it has been held to include adjacent buildings, gardens, courtyards, orchards, etc., which are necessary for the convenient occupation of the dwelling house.

Justice C. S. Dias further observed that the pre-emptive right of family members under Section 4 of the Act to buy out undivided share of the stranger co-owner can be invoked in such cases, even at the stage of execution, until the decree is fully satisfied.

S.149 MV Act | Vehicle Owner Not Liable If He Was Of Bona Fide Belief Regarding Genuineness Of Driver's License: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Aisha v. Xavier & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 493

The Kerala High Court on Thursday held that when the owner of a vehicle is satisfied that the driver has a license and is driving competently, there would be no breach of Section 149(2)(a)(ii) of the Motor Vehicles Act, and hence the Insurance Company would not be absolved from their liability to compensate the victim.

Justice Sophy Thomas, while holding so, observed, "Ultimately, if it is found that the license was fake, the Insurance Company will continue to remain liable, unless they prove that the owner-insured was aware or had noticed that the license was fake and still permitted that person to drive. Even in such a case the Insurance Company would remain liable to the innocent third party, but it may be able to recover from the insured".

Materials Before Court Insufficient To Decide Fraud In Relation To Existence Of Arbitration Agreement, Arbitrator To Decide Issue: Kerala HC

Case Title: M/S SVS Marketing Sanitary Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S Bathtouch Metals Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 494

The Kerala High Court on Thursday reiterated that where a plea of fraud is raised in a dispute, the civil aspect of fraud is arbitrable, unless the very arbitration agreement is found to have been vitiated by fraud.

As to the forum to decide upon the arbitrability of the agreement, Justice Satish Ninan reiterated that the Courts would be bound to refer the parties for adjudication unless it was evident that there was no valid arbitration agreement, nor an arbitrable dispute.

'Top Secret' Communication Sent To District Police Chief Leaked, Kerala HC Orders DGP To Probe

Case Title: Fasalu Rahman v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 495

The Kerala High Court recently directed the State Police Chief to investigate how Fasalu Rahman, an accused in a gold smuggling case, obtained a 'Top Secret' communication sent by the DGP to the District Police Chief Malappuram.

The Division Bench of Justice Anil K Nareendran and Justice P.G. Ajithkumar, observed that State Police, which is the executing agency in preventive detentions under COFEPOSA Act, has to maintain absolute secrecy in executing the detention orders and thereby, directed a detailed enquiry into how the 'Top Secret' communication dated 04.06.2022 reached the hands of the petitioner.

S.357 CrPC | When Fine Forms Part Of Sentence U/S 138 NI Act, Court Ought To Order Payment Of Compensation From Fine: Kerala HC

Case Title: Sanil James v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 496

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday, while considering a Revision Petition observed that in an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, when the Court imposes sentence of imprisonment and fine, it has to order payment of compensation from the amount of fine as provided under Section 357(1)(b) of CrPC.

Justice A. Badharudeen observed: "...in an offence under Section 138 of the N.I Act when the court imposes imprisonment and fine, fine forms part of the sentence. In such cases, the court has to order payment of compensation from the amount of fine as provided under Section 357(1)(b) of Cr.P.C."

'No Ground To Show Personal Bias Of Judge' :Kerala High Court Refuses To Transfer Trial Of Actor Assault Case; Dismisses Survivor's Plea

Case Title: XXX v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 497

The Kerala High Court on Thursday held that in the transfer petition moved by the victim in the actor assault case, that the petitioner could not make out a case for an order for transferring the case from the principal sessions court.

Justice Ziyad Rahman A. A., while so holding, fixed a time limit which is to expire on 31.01. 2023 for completion of the trial, and further directed that every endeavor ought to be made by all the parties concerned to complete the trial within the said period.

Actor Assault Case-Media Transgressed The Limits of Fairness, Reasonableness, and Rationality: Kerala High Court

Case Title: XXX v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 497

The Kerala High Court on Thursday, while dismissing the petition filed by the survivor of the sexual assault to transfer the case from the Principal Sessions Court, Ernakulam, berated the media for creating an air of distrust brought about through the 'trial' conducted in their studios.

Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A., while observing that the petitioner had been a "victim of such wrong perceptions and aspersions created by the media", went on to observe, "Although criticism is the backbone of democracy and the media is expected to do that, in this case, it is seen transgressed the limits of fairness, reasonableness and rationality".

Kerala HC Appoints Former Judge R. Bhaskaran As Observer For 'Melsanthies' Selection In Sabarimala & Malikappuram Temples

Case Title: Suo Motu v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 498

The Kerala High Court on Thursday appointed former Judge, Justice R. Bhaskaran, as an 'Observer' to oversee the proceedings for selection of 'Melsanthies' in Sabarimala Sree Dharma Sastha Temple and Malikappuram Temple, for the year 2022-23 (1198 ME).

A Division Bench comprising Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice P.G. Ajithkumar made the direction after perusing the Sabarimala Special Commissioner Report regarding the procedure to be adopted in order to ensure fairness in the selection procedure.

Madhu Lynching Case| Kerala High Court Dismisses Anticipatory Bail Plea of Accused Who Threatened Victim's Mother

Case Title: Abbas R.V. v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 499

The Kerala High Court on Friday declined to grant anticipatory bail to a person, who is also an accused in the Madhu lynching case, in an FIR alleging he trespassed into the house of victim's mother and threatened to murder her for "proceeding with" the trial pertaining to her son's death.

Upholding the order passed by the special court, Justice A. Badharudeen said Section 18 and 18-A of the SC/ST Act would apply to the case and therefore anticipatory bail cannot be granted.

S.163A MV Act | Borrower Of Vehicle Can't Claim Compensation From Insurer In Absence Of Personal Accident Coverage: Kerala HC

Case Title: The New India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Rajeswari & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 500

The Kerala High Court on Friday held that compensation could not be awarded to the heirs of the deceased, who 'stepped into the shoes of the owner', by borrowing the vehicle and whose rash and negligent driving brought about his own death.

Justice Sophy Thomas, while setting aside the order of the Motor Accident Tribunal granting compensation to the heirs of the deceased, observed, "Since he himself was the tortfeasor, his legal heirs cannot maintain a claim against himself who stepped into the shoes of the owner".

Whether Compulsory Retirement Warrants Reduction In Pension/ Gratuity To Be Decided At Time Of Imposing Punishment: Kerala HC

Case Title: A.G. Dinesh v. KSEB Ltd. & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 501

The Kerala High Court on Monday held that the decision as to whether a particular case where compulsory retirement is imposed warrants reduction in pension or gratuity or both is to be specifically considered by the authority imposing the punishment, at the time of such imposition itself.

Justice Anu Sivaraman, while holding so, observed that if the same was not done, "...the entire exercise of appreciation of the factors which lead to the imposition of the penalty will have to be redone at a later point in time which, according to me, would be impermissible since that would amount to a re-appreciation of the facts involved and therefore to double jeopardy".

Whether Suit Falls U/S 92 CPC Has To Be Decided Before Trial: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Sadasivan & Anr. v. Sadasivan Nair & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 502

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday held that the question as to whether a suit falls under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure (C.P.C.) would have to be decided before the trial.

Justice A. Badharudeen reasoned that a suit under Section 92 can be prosecuted only with the leave of the court and if the parties are relegated till the finalisation of the trial and if ultimately it is found that the Suit requires leave, the entire exercise of trial will become futile, as the Suit itself becomes barred for want of leave.

Sri Lankan Fishermen Apprehended On Suspicion Of Involvement In Drug Cartel Denied Bail By Kerala HC

Case Title: T. Sunil Kurera & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 503

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday denied bail to six Sri Lankan fishermen who had been apprehended by the Indian Coast Guard officials on suspicion that they are part of international drug cartels and had been involved in transporting the same at the time of apprehension.

Justice Viju Abraham observed that there was "considerable force" in Special Public Prosecutor's argument that petitioners being nationals of Sri Lanka, there is every chance for them to abscond and their presence cannot be secured at the time of trial.

'Was Absconding For 12 Years': Kerala HC Denies Anticipatory Bail To 70-Yr-Old In Minor's Rape Case

Case Title: Puthukkattu Pareekutty Aliyar v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 504

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday dismissed the anticipatory bail application of a 70-year-old accused in a rape case who has been absconding for 12 years.

Justice Bechu Kurain Thomas rejected the contention raised by the petitioner that he was unaware of the crime registered against him. "The investigation against the petitioner was stalled for the last 12 years due to the absence of the petitioner in the country. It cannot be believed that the petitioner was unaware of the crime registered against him. He was thus absconding for the last 12 years and more".

Possession Of Higher Qualification Presupposes Acquisition Of Lower Qualification Unless Recruiter Stipulates Otherwise: Kerala HC

Case Title: Central University Kerala & Anr. v. Joshila J.U.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 505

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday held that possession of higher qualifications by a candidate in a selection process presupposes the acquisition of the lower qualification for the said post.

The Division Bench comprising Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S. Sudha while holding so, observed that where the candidate does not hold the essential qualification, i.e., a Diploma, but higher qualification, the same could not be taken to disqualify the candidate. "...It is trite that a higher qualification, in order to become eligible for selection to a post for which a lower qualification has been prescribed, must presuppose the acquisition of the lower qualification. It is also trite that if one holds a higher qualification in the same faculty, the same can certainly be stated to presuppose the acquisition of the lower qualification", the Court reiterated.

State's Appeal Against Order Directing It To Release Funds To KSRTC Infructuous: Kerala High Court

Case Title: State of Kerala v. R. Baji

Citation: 2020 LiveLaw(Ker) 506

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday dismissed the state government's appeals against an order directing it to release requisite funds to KSRTC. A single bench last month had directed the State to release the funds, required by KSRTC to clear salary dues of its employees for July and August months and the bonus eligible to those below the managerial cadre, on or before September 1

The Division Bench consisting of Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P declared the appeals infructuous after considering the submissions of the Advocate General.

Legal Advice Given By Advocate General To Government Exempted From Disclosure Under RTI Act: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Secretary to Advocate General & Ors. v. State Information Commissioner & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 507

The Kerala High Court on Friday held that the legal advice rendered by the Advocate General to the Government is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(e) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act, 2005) as the relationship between the two constituted a fiduciary relationship.

Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan in the ruling said:

"...there may be delicate and sensitive issues, in which the Government wants the opinion of the Advocate General. Those are confidential communications between the Government and the Advocate General. The legal opinions given by the Advocate General to the Government should always be confidential. That is protected under Section 8(1)(e) of the Act 2005".

Other Significant Developments 

Remarks Against Chief Minister: State Opposes Swapna Suresh's Plea In Kerala High Court To Quash FIR

How Can A Statement Recorded U/S 164 CrPC Be Defamatory? Kerala High Court Reserves Order In Saritha's Plea

Five Paperless Benches To Start Functioning Today: Kerala High Court Issues Guidelines

As five benches gear up to go paperless starting today, the Kerala High Court has issued certain guidelines to be followed by the lawyers. Paperless courts have been introduced in the single benches with Bail jurisdiction and Tax matters, as well as the division bench that considers appeals from these single benches.

Brewery License Case | Kerala High Court Extends Stay On Vigilance Court's Order Directing State To Produce Files

The Kerala High Court on Monday extended its stay on the Thiruvanathapuram vigilance court order, which had directed the State to produce the files related to the brewery allotment corruption case.

Justice K. Babu extended the stay while considering a plea filed by the State Government challenging the vigilance court order.

Kerala Court Sentences Three Accused After They Plead Guilty In Kalamassery Bus Burning Case

Case Title: Union of India v Nazeer Thadiyantavidatha @ Ummer Haji & Ors.

A court in Kerala on Monday sentenced Thadiyantavida Nazeer, a suspected Lashkar-e-Taiba operative, and his accomplice to 7 years of rigorous imprisonment in the 2005 Kalamassery bus burning case while sentencing another accused in the case to 6 years imprisonment.

NIA Special Court Judge K Kamanees had convicted them last week after the trio admitted their guilt in the case. The sentence was imposed considering their guilty plea and their young age at the time of committing the crimes.

Kerala High Court Reserves Order In Plea Seeking To Disqualify MLA Saji Cherian Over His Remarks On The Constitution

Case Title: Biju P. Cheruman v. Election Commission of India & Ors.

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday reserved its verdict in the plea seeking a direction to declare that CPI(M) legislator and former minister Saji Cherian is not entitled to hold the office of MLA after his remarks allegedly insulting the Constitution sparked a controversy across the State.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly heard the parties before reserving its orders in the matter today.

Impossible To Pay Off KSRTC's Recurring Liabilities Unless All Stakeholders Act In Unison: Kerala High Court

Case Title: R. Baji & Ors. v. KSRTC & Ors.

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday, while hearing the plea moved by the KSRTC employees alleging that they were not being paid salary promptly, pulled up on the Employees Unions for continuing the strikes despite assuring the Court that the strikes would be called off.

Justice Devan Ramachandran opined that unless KSRTC, Government and the employees act in unison, it would be impossible to find resources to pay off the recurring liabilities of the Corporation.

Evidence Tampering Case| Minister Antony Raju Moves Kerala High Court Seeking To Quash Proceedings Against Him

Case Title: Adv. Antony Raju v. State of Kerala and Others

Transport Minister Antony Raju has approached the Kerala High Court alleging patent illegality in the procedure adopted by the Kerala High Court and by the Session Court, Thiruvanthapuram, and the Police in the evidence tampering case in which he is an accused and thereby, the continuation of the proceedings before the Court below would be a clear abuse of the process of Court.

NEET-UG | Female Candidates Forced To Remove Innerwear: Kerala High Court Seeks Response From NTA

Case Title: Asif Azad v. Union of India & Ors

The Kerala High Court has directed the National Testing Agency (NTA) to file a detailed statement explaining the manner in which the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) was conducted at its Kollam centre where female aspirants were asked to remove their innerwear before attempting the exam after metallic hooks were detected during screening.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly issued the order on Wednesday in a PIL seeking compensation to the affected candidates and asked the NTA to produce all relevant documents to explain the inquiry conducted into the same.

Kerala High Court Issues Notice On PIL Challenging Arrests For "Black Flag" Protests Against Chief Minister

Case Title: Sam Joseph v. State of Kerala and Others

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday sought answers from the State Government in a Public Interest Litigation filed challenging the arrest and detention of persons who protested against the Chief Minister by waving black flags.

A Division Bench consisting of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P Chaly has issued notice to the Kerala Government and the District Police Complaint Authority and has directed them to file counter affidavit.

PIL Filed In Kerala High Court Against Ernakulam District Collector Over Delay In Declaring Holiday For Schools Amid Heavy Rains

Case Title: M.R. Dhanil v. District Collector and Others.

A Public Interest Litigation was filed before the Kerala High Court against the delayed decision of the District Collector, Ernakulam, to declare holiday for the Schools and Colleges in the District due to heavy rainfall. It also sought a directive to frame proper guidelines on declaring holidays to the Schools and Colleges.

The PIL has been filed by Advocate MR Danil, a lawyer practising at the High Court. The petitioner submitted that the District Collector declared holiday to all the schools and colleges in the district due to heavy rainfall at 8:45 AM on the concerned day through a social media post. Later, the District Collector clarified that the Schools that have already started functioning need not be closed.

Kerala High Court Reserves Order In Bail Plea Moved By SFI Leader Who Violated Earlier Bail Conditions

Case Title: Arsho P.M v. State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court on Friday reserved its verdict on the bail application moved by Arsho P.M, the State Secretary of the Students' Federation of India (SFI), who was taken into custody for the second time after he violated the bail conditions imposed on him.

Justice Viju Abraham heard both the counsels extensively before reserving orders in the bail application. The Judge orally remarked that the decision will be pronounced next week.

I Was A Voter In The Constituency: Kerala HC Judge Recuses From Hearing CPI(M) Leader's Election Petition Challenging Congress Candidate's Victory

Case Title: Adv. M. Swaraj v. K. Babu

Justice Sophy Thomas of the Kerala High Court on Friday recused from hearing the plea moved by CPI(M) leader and former MLA M. Swaraj challenging the election of Congress candidate K. Babu from the Tripunithura constituency.

When the case was taken up, Justice Thomas recused from the case citing that she was a voter of the same constituency.

Agnipath Scheme: Kerala High Court Directs Registry To Accept Petitions After AFT Refuses To Hear Challenge

Case Title: Nandu Krishnan R & Ors v. Union of India & Ors. and connected matters

The Kerala High Court on Friday directed its Registry to accept two petitions challenging the Centre's Agnipath recruitment scheme for armed forces, that were flagged as "defective" on point of maintainability.

This comes after the Kochi bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal refused to hear the challenge.

Justice Anu Sivaraman, after hearing the arguments raised by Advocates Siji Antony, John Varghese and P.M Joseph, directed the Registry to number the cases and place them for admission before the bench on the next day.

Kerala High Court Directs Registry To Transfer All Cases Challenging Agnipath Scheme To Delhi High Court

Case Title: Nandu Krishnan R & Ors v. Union of India & Ors. and connected matters

The Kerala High Court on Monday directed the Registry to transfer three petitions relating to the Agnipath scheme to the Delhi High Court so that the matter can be renumbered and be heard along with the other pending similar matters.

Justice Anu Sivaraman transferred the cases relied on the Apex Court Order directing the transfer of all Agnipath-related matters to the Delhi High Court. This comes after the Kochi bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal refused to hear the challenge.

Kerala High Court Launches Suo Moto PIL To Monitor Flood Relief Activities, Directs State To Take Prompt Action To Prevent Disasters

Case Title: Foundation for Restoration of National Values v. State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court has initiated a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) directing the State Government to take proper and prompt action during monsoons considering that persistent rainfall has caused severe loss to the lives and properties of people in the State.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly launched the PIL to monitor the governmental action in providing appropriate mechanisms to manage emergency situations arising during the monsoon season and otherwise under the Disaster Management Act.

Kerala High Court Seeks NMC's Response On Plea For Practical Training, Internships For Indian Medical Students In Chinese Universities

Case Title: Parents Association of Foreign Medical Graduates v. Union of India & Ors.

The Kerala High Court has sought the response of the National Medical Commission in a plea filed on behalf of 92 medical students studying in different universities in China seeking practical training and internship facilities in India till the travel restrictions to China are lifted.

Justice V.G Arun directed the NMC to file an affidavit communicating the Commission's stand on the issue.

Former Kerala Finance Minister Thomas Issac Moves High Court Challenging ED Summons In Connection With KIIFB Transactions

Dr Thomas Issac, former Finance Minister of Kerala and a member of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), has approached the Kerala High Court challenging the summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate seeking his appearance in connection with the financial transactions of the Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board (KIIFB).

In the writ petition, Issac stated that the ED, without disclosing the real nature of the investigation, has asked him to appear on August 11 to explain his role in the KIIFB. Though the summons mentions provisions of the Foreign Exchange Management Act and the Income Tax Act, it does not reveal what are the violations to which the petitioner is required to respond. It is argued that the attempt of the ED is to initiate a "fishing and roving enquiry" by keeping the petitioner in dark about the real nature of the allegations. Thomas had submitted in his writ petition that the central agency had asked him to produce the details of his properties, both moveable and immoveable, as well as those of his family members.

PIL Seeks Special Assistance For All Differently-Abled Students In Exams; Kerala High Court Issues Notice To Centre, State & Education Dept

Case Title: Blessen Baby v. Union of India & Ors

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has reached the Kerala High Court seeking assistance for all differently-abled students in examinations, regardless of the percentage of their disability.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly recently issued notice to the Centre, State and the relevant State Education Departments in the plea.

'He Has Right To Privacy': Kerala HC Asks ED Why Thomas Issac Should Produce Documents Of His Assets At First Instance

Case Title: Dr T.M. Thomas Isaac v. The Deputy Director

The Kerala High Court on Thursday asked the Enforcement Directorate to explain why former Finance Minister of Kerala Dr Thomas Issac was asked to produce private information regarding his assets at this preliminary stage of the case, particularly when he was not even an accused or suspect yet.

Justice V G Arun raised the question while hearing the plea filed by Issac against the proceedings initiated by the ED seeking his appearance in connection with the financial transactions of the Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board (KIIFB). Thomas had submitted in his writ petition that the central agency had asked him to produce the details of his properties, both moveable and immoveable, as well as those of his family members.

Kerala High Court Questions Maintainability Of MLAs' PIL Against ED Probe Into KIIFB, Reserves Verdict

Case Title: KK Shailaja & Ors. v Union of India & Ors.

The Kerala High Court on Thursday reserved its verdict on a PIL moved by five MLAs against the ongoing Enforcement Directorate probe into the financial transactions of the Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board (KIIFB).

A Division Bench of Chief Justice S Manikumar and Justice Shaji P Chaly doubted the maintainability of the plea on the grounds that it may not qualify as a public interest litigation and that the investigation of the case was still at its preliminary stage.

Salary Paid Overlooking Other Essential Expenses, Forced To Cut Down Trips: KSRTC Seeks 10 More Days To Disburse Pending Salary Before Kerala High Court

Case Title: R. Baji & Ors. v. KSRTC & Ors.

The Kerala State Transport Employee Association (KSRTC) has sought ten more days from the Kerala High Court to disburse salary yet to be paid to its employees.

This comes after the Court directed KSRTC to disburse salary to its employees for the months of June and July before August 10 while adjudicating on a plea alleging that the employees were not being paid promptly.

Transportation Of LPG Cylinders A Public Utility Service: Kerala High Court Restrains Strike

Case Title: Sri Sivabalan Transports & Ors v. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd & Ors.

The Kerala High Court on Friday, while declaring the transportation of LPG Cylinders to be a 'public utility service' as defined in Section 2(n) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, restrained a proposed strike by members of Kannur District Fuel Employees Union. It held that no person employed in such public utility service can go on strike during the pendency of conciliation proceedings before a Conciliation Officer and seven days after the conclusion of such proceedings.

Justice Murali Purushothaman, while observing that since conciliation proceedings were pending in the instant case, and since Section 22 prohibits strikes and lockouts during the pendency of any such conciliation proceedings, issued an interim order restraining the proposed strike on 22nd and 23rd of August, 2022, or any subsequent day during the pendency of the aforementioned proceedings.

Session Judge Who Passed 'Provocative Dress' Order In Civic Chandran's Case Moves Kerala High Court Challenging His Transfer

Case Title: S. Krishnakumar v. State of Kerala

Principle District and Sessions Judge, Kozhikode, S. Krishnakumar, who was recently transferred to the post of Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Kollam, subsequently after passing the 'Provocative Dress' remark in the Civic Chandran's Case, has approached the Kerala High Court challenging his transfer order.

In the petition moved through Advocates Dinesh Mathew J. Muricken, Ahammad Sachin K, Nayana Varghese and Vinod S. Pillai, the Petitioner challenges the transfer from the post over a controversial remark about the dressing of a sexual assault survivor in a judicial order alleging that the transfer is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.

They Are Ordinary People, Not Criminals': High Court Asks Govt To Look Into Cases Registered Against K-Rail Silverline Protesters

Case Title: Muralikrishnan v. State of Kerala & connected matters

The Kerala High Court on Monday directed the Government to look into the criminal cases registered against the citizens who opposed laying of survey stones for the K-Rail Project.

Justice Devan Ramachandran observed that even the Government has realised that a project of this nature cannot be executed without the support and help of the citizenry as a whole which is evident from their subsequent orders directing the SIA to be complete only electronically or via geotagging.

Kerala High Court Reserves Its Order On The Plea moved by Judge Who Passed 'Provocative Dress' Order In Civic Chandran's Case

Case Title: S. Krishnakumar v. State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday reserved order in the plea moved by the Principle District and Sessions Judge, Kozhikode, challenging his transfer order to the post of Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Kollam, subsequently after passing the 'Provocative Dress' remark in the Civic Chandran's Case.

Justice Anu Sivaraman observed that the transfer is not a deputation as it is well within the cadre of the Principle District Judge.

Kerala Govt Has No Obligation To Pay KSRTC Salaries: State's Appeal In High Court

Case Title: State of Kerala v. R. Baji

The Kerala Government has approached the High Court challenging the order directing it to release requisite funds to KSRTC to clear salary dues of its employees for the months of July and August, along with the bonus eligible to those below the managerial cadre on or before the 1st September.

In the Writ Appeal moved through Special Government Pleader Advocate P. Santhosh Kumar, the State challenged the order passed by the Court on 24th August 2022, contending that the State Government has no obligation to pay salary and other allowance to the employees of the KSRTC.

Kerala High Court Seeks State's Response On Plea For Salary Hike, Better Working Conditions For Private Hospital Nurses

Case Title: Indian Professional Nurses Association v. State of Kerala & Ors.

The Kerala High Court has sought a reply from the State regarding the salary and working conditions of nurses working in private hospitals. This comes in the plea moved by the Indian Professional Nurses Association seeking implementation of Prof. Jagadish Prasad Committee Report.

Justice P. V. Kuhnikrishnan admitted the PIL and sought reply from the Kerala Government.

The plea moved through Advocates Jose Abraham, N Ragesg, Adithyan Ezhapilly and R. Muraleedharan submits that subsequent to the Supreme Court decision, the Central Government had constituted an Expert Committee to make recommendations for the improvement of the working conditions and salaries of nurses working in private hospitals and nursing homes.

Kerala High Court Stays Single Judge Bench Direction To State Govt To Release Funds To KSRTC

Case Title: State of Kerala v. R. Baji

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday stayed an order passed by the single judge bench of the Kerala High Court directing the State directing it to release requisite funds to KSRTC to clear salary dues of its employees for the months of July and August, along with the bonus eligible to those below the managerial cadre on or before the 1st September.

The Division Bench consisting of Justice A K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias CP, while admitting the Writ Appeal f, has passed the stay order in the Appeal moved by the Kerala Government challenging the impugned order.

Kerala High Court Directs Mahatma Gandhi University To Ensure Statutory Clearances For Conducting B.Voc. Courses

Case Title: Nirmal Infopark(India) Ltd. v. State of Kerala & Ors.

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday directed the Mahatma Gandhi University at Kottayam to ensure that it offers and conducts B.Voc. courses only on the strength of required statutory clearances, including those from the University Grants Commission and All India Council For Technical Education.

The direction was made while admitting a plea seeking detailed enquiry regarding the activities of 5 institutions in offering B.Voc. courses and courses affiliated with foreign universities to students in the State. Justice Devan Ramachandran has further directed the University to file a report indicating the approval obtained by the party respondents, if any, before the next posting.

ED Singling Out Kerala; Protracted Investigation May Have Lasting Ramifications On State Infra, Foreign Banks Denying Funds: KIIFB To High Court

Case Title: Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board (KIIFB) v. Director, Directorate of Enforcement

The Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board (KIIFB) on Friday submitted before the High Court that the protracted investigation against it initiated by the Enforcement Directorate had detrimentally affected its borrowing plans, which would not only jeopardize the Board's functioning but would also have the effect of stalling various developmental projects in the State.

Justice V. G. Arun has adjourned to 23rd September the two petitions challenging the summons issued by ED in connection with the probe into the financial transaction of KIIFB.

MBBS : Kerala High Court Admits Plea Challenging NMC Rule Limiting Number Of Attempts To Clear Exam, Protects Students From Coercive Action

Case Title: Amal Nasim M. & Ors. v. Kerala University of Health Science & Ors.

The Kerala High Court on Friday admitted a petition filed by a group of students pursuing MBBS course in various colleges under the Kerala University of Health Sciences (KUHS), challenging the amendment to the Regulations on Graduate Medical Education,1997 by the National Medical Commission

The Amendment notified on 04.11.2019 had restricted the maximum number of attempts to clear the first Professional University examination to four. The petitioners contended that as per the earlier guidelines of the Medical Commission of India ( replaced by NMC from 2019), the course could be completed within 10 years.

Kerala High Court Refuses To Stay Proceedings In Assembly Ruckus Case

Case Title: K. Ajith. v. State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court on Friday refused to stay the proceedings in the Kerala Legislative Assembly Ruckus Case.

Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A., while refusing to stay the proceedings further rejected the prayer of the accused political leaders to exempt their personal appearance in trial court.

The case involves ruckus which had happened in the Kerala Assembly in March 2015, while the CPI(M) members were protesting against the then UDF government over the bar bribery allegations against the then Finance Minister KM Mani, who was trying to present the budget speech.

Kerala HC Says It Has Seen Cases Of Deaths Due To COVID-19 Vaccination After Effects; Asks NDMA To Frame Guidelines For Compensation

Case Title: Sayeeda K. A. v. Union of India & Ors.

The Kerala High Court, on Thursday, directed the National Disaster Management Authority to formulate policy or guidelines for identifying cases of death due to the after-effect of Covid-19 vaccination and for compensating the dependants of the victims within three months.

Justice V. G. Arun observed that there are instances where persons are suspected of having succumbed to the after-effects of immunization; in such circumstances, the National Disaster Management Authority and the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare are bound to formulate a policy for identifying such cases and compensating the dependents of the victim.

German National Volunteering In India Moves Kerala High Court Alleging Sexual Harassment By NGO's General Secretary, Notice Issued

Case Title: xxxxxx v. Union of India & Ors.

The Kerala High Court, on Tuesday, issued notice on a plea moved by a German national seeking initiation of criminal proceedings against the General Secretary of Sister Hatune Foundation, Asia Sector, for various criminal offences committed by him, including the offence of Sexual Harassment.

Justice N. Nagaresh has also stayed the operation of the Exit Permit which was issued to the German national, who was working as a volunteer teacher at the NGO, till 23rd September.

Kerala's First Child-Friendly Family Court To Be Inaugurated At Kozhikode Today

Pursuant to the suggestions made by the Kerala High Court earlier this year, the Family Court at Kozhikode has become the first "child-friendly" Family Court in the State.

Named 'Swapnakoodu', this first of its kind initiative in the State is a joint endeavour of the Calicut Judiciary and the Calicut Bar Association Committee, 2022. This novel venture is set to be inaugurated today by the District and Sessions Judge, S. Krishna Kumar at 1.30 P.M. at the Calicut Bar Association Hall.

State Obliged To Protect Citizens From Ferocious Dogs, But People Can't Take Law Into Hands To Harm Dogs : Kerala High Court

Case Title: In Re: Bruno v. Union Of India & Ors.

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday observed that the State Administration is obligated to protect the citizens from the attacks of ferocious dogs by identifying and containing such dogs and removing them from public places.

A bench of Justice A. K. Jayashankaran Nambiar and Justice Gopinath P. J., in the special sitting convened after noting the increasing instances of dog bites reported across the State, observed that it is the obligation of the State to protect the citizens from the attacks of ferocious dogs by identifying and containing such dogs and removing them from public places. "The State Administration must remind itself of the fact that in its role as a welfare state and as a parens patriae of the citizenry, it is obligated to protect the citizens from the attracks of ferocious dogs by identifying and containing such dogs and removing them from public places".

Adani Vizhinjam Ports Files Contempt Petition Against Kerala Government Alleging Violation Of HC Order For Police Protection

Case Title: M/S Adani Vizhinjam Ports Pvt Ltd & Ors v. Dr. V.P. Joy IAS & Ors.

M/S Adani Vizhinjam Ports Pvt Ltd has moved the High Court of Kerala by filing a Memorandum of Contempt under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, alleging willful disobedience of the respondent State government in complying with the Kerala High Court Order dated 01.09.2022 granting police protection for the petitioners.

Vide the said Order, the Kerala High Court had granted the police protection to the petitioners sought for, while adding that the protests could go on peacefully, without causing any obstruction and without any trespass being permitted into the project area. "The right to agitate or protest against any matter including the apathy or neglect of the Government cannot confer any right either on respondents 11 to 25 or any of the protesters to contend that they have a right to obstruct the activities which have due permissions or to trespass into the project site and cause damage to public property", it had been observed.

Kerala High Court Admits Medical Practitioners' Plea Seeking Permission To Practice Multiple Systems Of Medicine

Case Title: Dr. Ranjith Kumar P. v. Ethics and Medical Registration Board, National Medical Commission

The Kerala High Court has admitted and issued notice to the concerned authorities in a plea challenging Clause (F) in Chapter 2 of the National Medical Commission, Registered Medical Practitioner (Professional Conduct) Regulations, 2022 which prevents registered medical practitioners from practicing any other system of medicine, once licensed to practice Modern Medicine under the National Medical Commission Act, 2019.

Justice V.G. Arun, while admitting the matter, further sought response from the Central Government and the National Medical Commission (NMC) on this matter.

NCLT Kochi Bench Re-Constituted, Proceedings To Be Conducted Only On Wednesday, Thursday And Friday Until Further Orders

File No.: 10/03/2022-NCLT

The National Company Law Tribunal, Kochi Bench, has been re-constituted vide a Circular dated 14.09.2022, issued by NCLT as per Section 419(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. The new NCLT Kochi Bench shall comprise of:

NCLT Kochi (First Half)

1. Shri P. Mohan Raj (Judicial Member)

2. Shri Satya Ranjan Prasad (Technical Member)

The Circular has been issued in partial modification of Order of even number dated 01.07.2022 and is applicable from 15.09.2022 till further orders. The reconstituted Bench shall conduct proceedings on every Wednesday, Thursday and Friday only and the matters shall be heard through Video Conferencing.

'Provocative Dress' Remark : Sessions Judge Files Appeal Before Kerala HC DB Against Single Bench Order Upholding Transfer

Case Title: S. Krishnakumar v. State of Kerala & Ors.

The Principle District and Sessions Judge, Kozhikode, S. Krishnakumar, who passed the controversial 'Provocative Dress' order in Civic Chandran's case, has approached the Kerala High Court challenging the dismissal of the plea moved by him challenging his transfer to the post of Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Kollam.

In the Writ Appeal moved through Advocate Mathew J Murikan, the appellant challenges the order passed by the Single Judge on the ground that it is not sustainable in law as the finding of the Single Judge that the transfer norms are only guidelines and that it will not confer any right on the transferred employee. It is contended that order is against the dictum laid down by the Apex Court in a recent decision on a similar matter.

Kerala High Court Stays Transfer Of Sessions Judge Who Passed 'Provocative Dress' Order

Case Title: S. Krishnakumar v. State of Kerala & Ors.

The Kerala High Court on Friday stayed the order transferring the Principle District and Sessions Judge, Kozhikode, S. Krishnakumar, who passed the controversial 'Provocative Dress' order in Civic Chandran's case, to the post of Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Kollam.

Division Bench consisting of Justice A K Jayashankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C P, while admitting the appeal, has stayed the transfer order till 26th September.

Kerala High Court Seeks UGC, AITC Stand On Plea Against Colleges Offering Foreign Collab Courses Sans Statutory Clearance

Case Title: Nirmal Infopark(India) Ltd. v. State of Kerala & Ors.

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday sought the stand of University Grants Commission and All India Council for Technical Education on colleges said to be offering B.Voc. Courses and courses in collaboration with Foreign Universities without obtaining all statutory and regulatory approvals required for conducting such courses.

Justice Devan Ramachandran adjourned the matter to 27th September for completion of counter pleadings of all the parties and also extended the order directing the Mahatma Gandhi University at Kottayam to ensure that it offers and conducts B.Voc. courses only on the strength of required statutory clearances, including those from the University Grants Commission and All India Council For Technical Education till 27th September.

Kerala Stray Dog Menace: High Court Directs Government Hospitals To Provide Free Medical Assistance To Victims Of Dog Bites

Case Title: In Re Bruno v. Union of India

The Kerala High Court on Friday directed that during the time taken by the State to establish and set up the machinery in the State to contain the menace of stray dogs, prompt, efficient and free medical assistance shall be provided to all victims of dog bites by government hospitals and hospitals attached to government medical colleges. It added that the said treatment shall also be without prejudice to the right of the person concerned to separately seek compensation from the State for the injuries, mental and/or physical, sustained by him/her, before the appropriate forum.

The Division Bench composed of Justice A. K. Jayashankaran Nambiar and Justice Gopinath P. J., while directing so, observed that adequate medical and vaccine supply shall also be ensured at these hospitals. "Once the State machinery has been established and set up to deal with the issue, we will lift the obligation for free treatment", the Court added in its oral observations. The Court further declared that in order to ensure that the machinery would be brought about efficiently, it shall monitor the steps taken in this regard on a weekly basis and requested for reports to be submitted accordingly.

Kerala High Court Takes Suo Moto Cognizance Of Unaffordability Of Patented Life-Saving Medicines Following Death Of Petitioner

Case Title: XXX v. Union of India

The Kerala High Court on Friday took suo moto cognizance of the unaffordability of patented life-saving medicines. Justice V.G. Arun, on being informed of the petitioner's death during the pendency of the proceedings, observed that, "the unfortunate incident should not result in the cause disposed by the petitioner to go in vain".

In the plea moved through Advocate Maitreyi Sachidananda Hegde, the petitioner who was a bank employee diagnosed with breast cancer and undergoing targeted therapy, averred that her treatment required three drugs, the monthly expense for which went over ₹63,000, out of which Ribocicilib alone costs ₹58,140.

Kerala High Court Constitutes District Collector Led Committee To Resolve Issue Of Flooding In Kochi

Case Title: Treasa K. J. v. State of Kerala and Connected Cases

The Kerala High Court, on Friday, directed the District Collector to convene a committee of all the stakeholders to resolve the issue of flooding in the city of Kochi.

Justice Devan Ramachandran expressed his displeasure at the fact that despite various orders being issued by the Court, the City of Kochi was flooded due to heavy rainfall last month and observed that one agency alone "cannot be trusted" with resolving the issue. "It is clear from real experience that one Agency alone cannot undertake, or be trusted with the resolution of the issues, particularly when rains are very heavy. I am, therefore, of the firm view that a Committee of the all stakeholders will have to be formed, to be headed by the District Collector, because the said officer is also the Chairperson of the District Disaster Management Authority".

'Expelling Members For Marrying Outside Community Violates Article 25' : Kerala Court Dismisses Knanaya Church's Appeals

Case Title: The Metropolitan Archbishop, the Archeparchy of Kottayam & Anr. v. Knanaya Catholic Naveekarana Samithy & Ors.

The Court of the Additional District Judge - V, Kottayam on an appeal before it from the judgment of the Additional Sub Court, Kottayam, held that endogamy within the Knanaya Catholic Community is not an essential religious practice and on this basis, the expulsion of the Knanaya Catholic member and their family unit permanently from the Church for marrying outside the community is violative of Article 25 of the Constitution of India.

In the Judgment delivered by the Additional District Judge-V, Sanu S. Panicker, while holding so, it was observed, "..I am of the view that endogamy is nothing but a marriage custom prevailing in the community, which is not an essential religious practice for limiting the membership of the Church, and as such, I am of the view that the Church would not be justified in regulating the membership of the Church on the basis of the custom of endogamy prevailing in the community".

Right To Be Forgotten Not Absolute, Must Be Balanced With Right To Know : Kerala HC Standing Counsel Tells High Court

Case Title: Virginia Shylu v. Union of India And Other Connected Cases

The Kerala High Court, on September 15, heard a batch of petitions seeking the removal of identifiable information from judgments or orders published in various online portals and the High Court Website, alleging that it is a violation of the Right to Privacy and Right to be Forgotten.

Division Bench consisting of Justice A Mohammed Mushtaq and Justice Sophy Thomas observed that when competing interest is involved certainly, the public interest will overtake the individual interest. It observed, "When Apex Court declared it as a Fundamental Right, right to be protected, then we, an institution, are we not bound to protect it? That is where the competing interest comes in one right of a citizen to publish and the fundamental right of another citizen to be protected. When competing interests are involved, certainly, the public interest will overtake the interest of the other citizen. Publishers like LiveLaw, Bar and Bench and Indian Kanoon are protected under Article 19, but we as an institution are not protected under Article 19".

Kerala High Court Pulls Up State Authorities For Not Setting Up Temporary Detention Centres For Foreign Citizens Lacking Travel Documents

Case Title: Olorumemi Benjamin Baba Femi v. Union of India

The Kerala High Court on Thursday, pulled up the State Authorities for failing to implement its orders for setting up of temporary detention centres for foreign citizens, who do not possess travel documents, and has directed the Secretary to Social Justice Department and Additional Chief Secretary, Home and Vigilance Department to set up the temporary facility on a war footing basis.

Justice Ziyad Rahman A A in the order dated September 15 remarked that despite various orders passed by the Court, the government is not taking proper steps.

Supreme Court Orders Status Quo On Guruvayur Devaswom's Donation To Chief Minister's Disaster Relief Fund

Case Title :Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee and Anr. vs. Bijesh Kumar M and Ors.

The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice in an appeal filed by Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee assailing the order of the High Court of Kerala where it was held that the Committee had no authority to donate money to the Chief Minister's Disaster Relief Fund and it amounts to violation of Guruvayoor Devaswom Act, 1978.

The bench of Chief Justice of India U. U. Lalit, Justice Ajay Rastogi and Justice S. Ravindra Bhat ordered status quo in the matter and stayed the operation of the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Kerala.

Advocates At Kerala High Court Boycott Court Work Against Police Atrocity In Solidarity With Kollam Bar Association

The Advocates practising at the High Court of Kerala boycott and abstain from Court work in protest against police atrocity in solidarity with Kollam Bar Association today. The Advocates are abstaining from Court work as the Government has not taken evident action against erring Police Officials in relation to the issue of police brutality against Advocate Jayakumar of Kollam Bar Association, says the notice issued by the Kerala High Court Advocates Association.

Lawyer Moves Kerala High Court Against Bharat Jodo Yatra Led By Congress MP Rahul Gandhi

Case Title: Adv. Vijayan K v. State of Kerala & Ors.

A Petition has been filed before the Kerala High Court against the Bharat Jodo Yatra led by Congress MP Rahul Gandhi, seeking direction to regulate the Yatra for causing traffic problems.

The petition filed by Advocate Vijayan K, sought for a direction to regulate the Yatra by permitting them to occupy half portion of the road and leaving the other half for the free movement of the vehicles and the public.

Kerala High Orders Status Quo In Renaming Kaloor-Kadavanthra Road

Case Title: Lawrence Alex & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Ors.

The Kerala High Court recently, issued an interim order directing that status quo ought to be maintained in the re-naming of the Kaloor-Kadavanthra Road for a period of one month. Justice N. Nagaresh passed the above order while admitting the petition.

In the petition moved through M/S Basil Mathew, Ninan John, Sanjana Sara Varghese Annie, and Ajay Krishnan S., it was averred that the petitioners, who are residents of the area, were personally affected by the decision of the Kochi Municipal Corporation (2nd respondent) to change the name of the Kaloor-Kadavanthra Road, in violation of the provisions of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994, and the Kerala Municipality (Procedure for Meeting of Council) Rules, 1995.

Kerala HC Adjourns Plea Alleging Bharat Jodo Yatra Is Causing Traffic Snarls To Monday

Case Title: Adv. Vijayan K v. State of Kerala & Ors.

The Kerala High Court on Thursday adjourned to Monday a petition seeking a direction to regulate the Bharat Jodo Yatra led by Congress MP Rahul Gandhi and asked the petitioner to inform it whether there was any violation of the police instructions that were given regarding traffic norms to be followed during the Yatra.

The Division Bench consisting of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly heard the matter briefly on Friday. When the case was taken up by the Court, it instructed the petitioner to find out whether the police instructions that were given regarding traffic norms to be followed during the Bharat Jodo Yatra were violated and inform the Court regarding the same on September 26.

Four Cops Suspended For Assaulting Lawyer Inside Kollam Police Station, Kerala High Court Told

Case Title: Yeshwanth Shenoy v. Gopakumar & Ors.

The Kerala High Court on Thursday was informed that four police officials were placed under suspension on Wednesday for allegedly thrashing and handcuffing a lawyer inside a police station on September 5.

The submission was made during the hearing of a contempt petition filed against the action of the officials of Kollam police station. The Division Bench comprising Justice A.K. Jayasankar Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. issued notice and posted the matter for further hearing on a later date after it was informed about suspension of the policemen.

"Illegal Installations Made By A Particular Political party On National Highway" : Kerala High Court On "Bharat Jodo Yatra" Flags, Banners

Case Title: St. Stephen's Malankara Catholic Chruch v. State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court, on Thursday, took a critical view of the flags and banners erected along the highways in the State as part of the "Bharat Jodo Yatra" led by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. The Court expressed dismay that the authorities have not removed the banners, boards and flags erected in violation of the earlier directions.

At the request of the Amicus Curiae Advocate Harish Vasudevan, the Court held an urgent hearing on the matter. The Amicus Curiae, in the report filed before the Court, submitted that a "particular political party", had illegally erected a large number of boards, banners, and flags in connection with the visit of a dignitary.

PFI's Flash Hartal Illegal : Kerala High Court Initiates Suo Motu Contempt Proceedings, Directs Police To Take Strict Measures

Case title: Kerala Chamber of Commerce and Industry v. State of Kerala and Malayalavedi v. State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court, on Friday, strongly condemned and initiated suo motu proceedings against the leaders of Popular Front of India (PFI), noting the illegal call for flash hartal in the State, which was earlier banned by the Court. The PFI called for dawn-to-dusk hartal in the State today following the the arrest of its leaders by the NIA yesterady.

Division bench consisting of Justice A. K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. observed that stringent action must be taken against the violators of the Court order.

Directions To Remove Illegal Banners & Flags Of Political Parties : Kerala High Court Expresses Dismay At Being Accused Of Having Agenda

Case Title: St. Stephen's Malankara Catholic Chruch v. State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court, on Friday, pulled up the Government for its failure to implement the directions for removal of illegal flags and banners erected along the highways in the State by various political parties. A bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran expressed his distress on the allegations that the High Court is aligning with certain political parties while passing orders. The bench observed in the order as follows :

'Accusing fingers are being pointed at the High Court that it acts with an agenda because some of the violations are not being dealt with as was done in the case of others. It is extremely unfortunate. When the Court has already passed orders, it is for the Government and its agencies to implement it continually in future, and it does not require this Court to intervene every time there is a violation.'

PIL In Kerala High Court Seeks Case Against Prof Irfan Habib For 'Heckling' Governor Arif Mohammed Khan In 2019

Case Title: T.G. Mohandas v. State of Kerala & Ors.

A Public Interest Litigation has been filed in Kerala High Court against the police's alleged inaction and failure in registering a case with regard to the "attempted criminal assault" on Governor Arif Mohammed Khan during a conference at Kannur University on December 28 in 2019.

The Petitioner, T.G. Mohandas, who is a retired engineer, advocate and a public worker has also been a former State Convenor of the Intellectual Cell of BJP. It has been stated in the plea that the Governor's speech at Kannur University during the conference was interrupted and he had been "overawed" by Prof. Irfan Habib, a prominent historian.

Stray Dog Menace: Kerala High Court Questions State About Measures To Identify Rabid Dogs, ABC Program

Case Title: In Re Bruno v. Union of India

The Kerala High Court on Friday continued its hearing on the stray dog menace in Kerala, and issued further directions in this regard.

The Court questioned what measures were taken to identify rabid dogs, based on the alarming figures it had noted in recent media reports which showed that there was 50% Test positivity. The Court asked the Additional Advocate General how many dogs had been identified as rabid. The Court further noted that rabies could be spread even by other animals such as rats and mongoose, and directed the Additional Advocate General to submit a report on the steps taken in that line.

Investigation Against KIIFB At Preliminary Stage; Issuance Of Summons Do Not Violate Right: ED Tells Kerala High Court

Case Title: Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board (KIIFB) v. Director, Directorate of Enforcement

The Enforcement Directorate has filed the counter affidavit in relation to its probe against the Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board (KIIFB), with respect to the latter's alleged violations of the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) by the issuance of "Masala Bonds" in 2019.

Apart from the KIIFB, Dr. Thomas Issac, who was the Finance Minister during the issuance of Masala Bonds by KIIFB, had also approached the High Court challenging the summons issued to him, contending that the agency was seeking to conduct a "fishing and roving" enquiry against him without revealing what the exact nature of violations are.

Inform How Losses Caused To KSRTC On Hartal Will Be Recovered From PFI : Kerala High Court Directs Govt

Case Title: R. Baji v. KSRTC

The Kerala High Court, on Friday, observed that Popular Front India and its officer bearers who called for a flash hartal in the state following the arrest of its leaders by the NIA, should be held responsible for the losses suffered by the KSRTC during the protest.

Justice Devan Ramachandran has directed the State Government to inform how it proposes to recover from the Popular Front of India and its office bearers the losses caused to the KSRTC on account of the attacks against the buses and the loss of trips during the flash hartal called by the PFI party.

Kerala High Court Extends Stay On Transfer Of Sessions Judge Who Passed 'Provocative Dress' Order

Case Title: S. Krishnakumar v. State of Kerala & Ors

Adjourning the matter to a later date, the Kerala High Court Monday extended its stay on the transfer of Principle District and Sessions Judge, Kozhikode, S. Krishna Kumar - who had passed the controversial 'Provocative Dress' order in Civic Chandran's case, to the post of Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Kollam.

The Division Bench consisting of Justice A K Jayashankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C P adjourned the case for after a week, as the High Court Registrar sought time for filing an explanation on the reason for the judge's transfer.

"No Centre's Approval, Project Is Nowhere, SIA Lapsed" : Kerala High Court Closes Writ Petitions Relating To K-Rail Silverline

Case Title: Muralikrishnan v. State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court on Monday has closed all the Writ Petitions filed in connection with the K-Rail Project for the time being, with full liberty to the petitioners to seek a rehearing when any further actions are taken by the Government of Kerala, either for the social impact assessment or acquisition of land.

Justice Devan Ramachandran observed that since the SIA notifications issued have lapsed and the land acquisition orders issued by the Kerala Government are at a standstill as the Central Government is yet to approve the DPR, the Court should not consider the matter at this stage.

Strain In Marriage Ground For Wife To Seek Abortion Of Pregnancy Upto 24 Weeks, Legal Divorce Or Husband's Consent Not Required : Kerala High Court

Case Title: X vs Union of India

In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court Monday said that the drastic changes in matrimonial life of a pregnant woman fulfils the condition of 'change of her marital status' in Rule 3B of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Rules, thus making her eligible to undergo medical termination of pregnancy up to 24 weeks.

Citing a Supreme Court judgement in which it was held that a woman's reproductive choice is also a dimension of her personal liberty and also relying on the apex court's recent order in an MTP case, Justice V.G. Arun said: "If interpreted and understood in the above manner, the drastic change in the matrimonial life of a pregnant woman is equivalent to the 'change of her marital status.' The word 'divorce' cannot in any manner qualify or restrict that right".

It was further added by the Court that, "the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act does not contain any provision requiring the woman to obtain her husband's permission for terminating the pregnancy. The reason being that it is the woman who bears the stress and strain of the pregnancy and the delivery".

Kerala High Court Dismisses PIL Filed Against Bharat Jodo Yatra Alleging Traffic Snarls

Case Title: Adv. Vijayan K v. State of Kerala & Ors.

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday dismissed the petition which alleged Congress MP Rahul Gandhi's Bharat Jodo Yatra was causing traffic snarls in the state.

The Division Bench consisting of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly dismissed the petition as the petitioner failed to produce documents proving the allegations averred in the plea. The Court had previously instructed the petitioner to find out whether the police instructions that were given regarding traffic norms to be followed during the Bharat Jodo Yatra were being violated.

KSRTC Moves Kerala High Court Seeking Over Rs 5 Crores From PFI For Hartal Losses

Case Title: Kerala State Road Transport v. Kerala Chamber of Commerce and Industry

The Kerala State Road Transport Corporation moves Kerala High Court seeking directive to Popular Front of India to pay Rs. 5.06 Crores as compensation for the damages caused to the corporation during the flash hartal called the party in the state following the arrest of its leaders by the NIA.

In the petition moved through the Standing Counsel for KSRTC, Advocate Deepu Thankan sought direction to the Popular Front of India party to pay compensation to the KSRTC for the loss sustained by them.

Kerala HC Initiates Suo Motu PIL To Include 'Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia' As Rare Disease, Ensure Financial Aid To Patients

Case Title: Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and Anr.

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday initiated a suo motu public interest writ petition to include 'Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia' in the group of rare diseases and to grant financial aid and support to the patients. It is a genetic disorders that affects adrenal glands.

A Division Bench consisting of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly has issued notices to the State government and the Principal Secretary to its Health and Family Welfare Department and has posted the matter after a week.

Constitution Guarantees Right To Live Without Any Religion, Non-Religious Persons Can't Be Sidelined : Kerala HC Judge Justice VG Arun

Justice V.G. Arun of Kerala High Court, on Sunday, inaugurated and addressed 'Life Without Religion Award Distribution and Humanist Youth Movement Convention' conducted by the Kerala Yukthivadi Sangham and the Kerala Misra Vivaha Vedi as part of 'SECULAM 2022' event.

"To live without adhering to any religion in our democratic secular country is certainly in tune with our Constitutional principles", Justice Arun said at the event.

Vizhinjam Protests: Kerala HC Orders State To Comply With Directions For Unhindered Access To Adani's Port Site, Seeks Report

M/S Adani Vizhinjam Ports Pvt Ltd & Ors v. Dr. V.P. Joy IAS & Ors.

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday reiterated that State must take steps to ensure unhindered access to under-construction Vizhinjam Port site, in compliance with its previous order issued last month.

Justice Anu Sivaraman was hearing the contempt petition filed by M/S Adani Vizhinjam Port Pvt Ltd, alleging willful disobedience of Court's order dated September 1, whereby it had granted police protection to company's employees and workmen and had ordered free ingress and egress to the construction site.

Kerala High Court Directs PFI To Deposit Over Rs 5 Crores Towards Hartal Damages, Says Citizens' Lives Can't Be Put In Peril

Case title: Kerala Chamber of Commerce and Industry v. State of Kerala and Malayalavedi v. State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court on Thursday directed the Popular Front of India (PFI) to deposit an amount of Rs. 5.20 crores with the Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department, towards the damages estimated by the State Government as well as the KSRTC on account of its 'flash hartal'.

A Division Bench consisting of Justice A. K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. observed that PFI and its general secretary are "wholly and directly responsible" for the injuries inflicted by their supporters on the citizens, as also for the damage caused to public/ private property.

Patents On Life-Saving Drugs: Kerala High Court Directs Union Health Ministry And Department Of Pharmaceuticals To File Response

Case Title: XXX v. Union of India

Taking serious note of the unaffordability of a life-saving patented medicine for breast cancer, the Kerala High Court on Thursday directed a competent officer of the union health ministry and the department of pharmaceuticals to file their response on the issue within a month.

The Court issued the direction after noting that the matter had to be taken up at the higher level.

Justice V.G. Arun warned that if the counter is not filed within the stipulated time, the court would be constrained to proceed with the case based on the "uncontroverted averments in the writ".

ED's Probe On Masala Bonds Affecting Infrastructure Development Plans In Kerala: KIIFB To High Court

Case Title: Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board (KIIFB) v. Director, Directorate of Enforcement

The Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board (KIIFB) has told the High Court that the Enforcement Directorate's protracted investigation into the issuance of Masala bonds is detrimentally affecting infrastructure development plans in the state.

The submission is part of a rejoinder filed by the KIIFB in response to a counter affidavit of the central agency. ED is probing the alleged violations of Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) in issuance of Masala Bonds in 2019. KIIFB had challenged the summons issued by Enforcement Directorate.

Right To Be Forgotten Can't Be Used As Tool To 'Erase History': Google Tells Kerala High Court

Virginia Shylu v. Union of India and Other Connected Cases

The Kerala High Court this week continued hearing a batch of petitions seeking enforcement of 'Right to be Forgotten' and consequent removal of identifiable information from judgments or orders published in various online portals and the High Court Website.

A Division Bench consisting of Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen heard the case of a dentist who is aggrieved by the appearance of his name on Google search engine and reflection of a previous case he was embroiled in. It was alleged that the petitioner's second marriage, his sister's marriage and several other personal hardships had befallen due to publication of the case against him.

Kerala High Court Stays Proceedings Against Mollywood Actor Sreenath Bhasi For Verbally Abusing Interviewer

Case Title: Mr. Sreenath Bhasi v. State of Kerala & Anr.

The Kerala High Court on Friday stayed the criminal proceedings initiated against actor Sreenath Bhasi over using filthy language against a female interviewer during an interview conducted by 'Bihind Woods' social media channel.

The stay has been granted on actor's plea filed through Advocates Martin Jose, P. Prijith, Thomas P. Kuruvilla, R. Githesh, Ajay Ben Jose, Manjunath Menon, Sachin Jacob Ambat, Anna Linda V. J., and Harikrishnan S, claiming that the matter has been settled between the parties.

[Masala Bonds Case] Kerala High Court To Pass Order On Oct 10 in Pleas Challenging ED Summons Against Dr Thomas Issac & KIIFB Officers

Case Title: Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board (KIIFB) v. Director, Directorate of Enforcement and Dr T.M. Thomas Isaac v. The Deputy Director

The Kerala High Court on Friday heard two petitions filed by Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board (KIIFB) and Former Finance Minister of Kerala Dr Thomas Issac challenging the summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with the investigation into the financial transactions of KIIFB.

Justice V G Arun heard the contentions raised by various counsels appearing in the petitions at length and posted the matter for 10th October for orders.

Fake Antique Dealer Case | Kerala High Court Stays Release Of Recovered Articles

Case Title: Monson M.C. @ Monson Mavunkal v. State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court recently stayed an order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam for release of various curios recovered from infamous fake antiques dealer Monson Mavunkal.

The counsels representing Mavunkal before the bench of Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. argued that even though he was a party to the proceedings before the Additional CJM, no notice had been served on him, and that the order had been passed by the Court below under Section 451 of Cr.P.C. without hearing him. The petitioner was represented by Advocates M.G. Sreejith, Vidyajith M., P. Jaya, and Luke J. Chirayil.