Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 27 To July 3 2022

Kerala Education Rules | Only State-Authorised Officer Empowered To Extend Higher Secondary School Teachers' Suspension Beyond 15 Days: High Court

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

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 304

The High Court recently observed that according to the proviso to Rule 67(7) of Chapter XIVA of Kerala Education Rules (KER), sanction to extend the period of suspension of a teacher in Higher Secondary School can only be granted by the officer authorised by the Government, and not by the Director of General Education (DGE). Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas added that though the power of suspension is only with the school Manager and for the first 15 days the said power is absolute, the subsequent power to extend the period of suspension is a regulated power.

Can Anticipatory Bail Plea Of Accused Who Went Abroad After Registration of Crime Be Entertained? Kerala HC Doubts "Vijay Babu" Judgment

Case Title: Anu Mathew v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 305

Justice P.V Kunhikrishnan differed from the law laid down by the High Court's coordinate bench last week wherein it was held that Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has no restrictive mandate that a person outside India cannot file an application seeking anticipatory bail. While granting anticipatory bail to actor-producer Vijay Babu in a rape case, Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas had held that a person who is outside India can very well file an anticipatory bail application, as long as before the final hearing, the accused is in India.

Courts Should Make Every Endeavour To Dispose A Case On Merits Rather Than On Default: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Zerita Ashlen Rocha & Anr v. Ann Mary Varghese

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 306

The High Court has ruled that courts should attempt to dispose of matters on merit rather than on default and avoid utilising a hypertechnical approach when presented with a case. Justice C.S Dias held so after observing that a trial court had overlooked the timely submission of a written statement in a money suit merely because it contained certain formal defects.

Trial Courts Should Pass Speaking Orders In Main Case & Counter-Case, Refrain From Dismissing Counter Cases On Flimsy Grounds: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Amir & Anr v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 307

The High Court has laid down the procedure to be adopted when there is a case and a counter case and the trial court is of the opinion that the counter case is to be discharged. Justice P.V Kunhikrishnan opined that trial courts should refrain from taking shortcuts by dismissing the counter-case on flimsy grounds through non-speaking orders.

Arrest In Breach Of "Arnesh Kumar" Guidelines : Kerala High Court Seeks Explanation From Judicial Magistrate For Remanding Accused

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

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 308

The Court recently sought an explanation from a Judicial Magistrate for remanding an accused without satisfying if the arrest has been carried out in compliance with 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 also issued a contempt notice to the Police Officer who carried out the arrest while condemning the lack of response from his side in the proceedings.

Right To Worship Is A Civil Right Subject To Restrictions Imposed By Temple's Managing Committee: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Suo Motu v. The Managing Committee & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 309

The High Court recently directed the Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee to ensure that any entry restrictions imposed into the Nalambalam of Guruvayur Sree Krishna Temple are strictly complied with and are not flouted by any individual, including its members, Administrators or former officers. The Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice P.G Ajithkumar also ruled that a worshipper was bound to exercise their right to worship subject to the traditions and restrictions in place.

Non-Compliance With S.279, 281 CrPC Only An Irregularity But That Is Not Permission To Violate It: Kerala High Court

Case Title: K.B. Rasheed v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 310

The High Court has ruled that failure to interpret evidence against the accused in the language they are familiar with, as mandated under Sections 279 and 281 of CrPC, may be a mere irregularity, but the prosecution is not allowed to violate these provisions. Justice PG Ajithkumar observed so in the light of precedents which establish that non-compliance with Sections 279(1), 279(2) or 281(4) is a mere irregularity, and that unless prejudice is caused to the accused, that irregularity will not vitiate the trial altogether.

Young Minds Develop Negative Notions Of Justice Delivery System: Kerala HC Suggests Introducing Child-Friendly Rooms In Family Courts

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 311

The Kerala High Court has suggested introducing child-friendly rooms in all Family Courts in the State after finding that they were operating with inadequate infrastructure and facilities. The Court thereby directed the Registrar of the District Judiciary to submit a report on the number of POCSO Courts functioning in the near vicinity of all Family Courts and to explore the possibility of dedicating a separate room in all the Family Courts. A Division Bench of Justice A Muhamed Mustaque and Justice C.S Dias observed that the congested and overcrowded premises often scar young children who are forced to visit the courts with an averse idea of the justice delivery system in the country.

Kerala High Court Asks Censor Board To Decide Objection Filed Against Prithviraj-Starrer 'Kaduva'

Case Title: Jose Kuruvinakkunnel v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 312

The High Court asked the Central Board of Film Certification to take a decision on the objection filed before it challenging the proposed theatre release of Prithviraj-starrer Malayalam movie 'Kaduva'. Justice V.G Arun also asked the authority to take an independent decision on the same after personally hearing the parties, dehors the findings of the civil court on the release of the movie.

Potential Cabinet Papers Yet To Be Brought Before Council Of Ministers Exempted From Disclosure Under RTI Act: Kerala High Court

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

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 313

The High Court has ruled that potential cabinet papers which have not yet been brought before the Council of Ministers are exempted from disclosure under the Right to Information Act. Section 8(1)(i) of the RTI Act exempts disclosure of cabinet papers including records of deliberations of the Council of Ministers, Secretaries and other officers. Justice Murali Purushothaman held that such exemption is also applicable to "potential" cabinet papers since, if disclosure of information is allowed before it reaches the Council, the provision for exemption under Section 8(1)(i) of the Act will stand defeated.

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

Case Title: Bharat Petroleum Corporation & Anr v. Saju A.R & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 314

The High Court held that a writ petition in cases where an employee is effectively seeking the enforcement of rights conferred under an industrial settlement is not maintainable before a High Court if the rights in question can only be traced to the settlement and not to any common or civil law. A Division Bench of Justice A.K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P ruled that in labour matters, the origin of the right alleged to be infringed decides if a High Court should exercise its discretionary remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution to entertain a petition filed by an employee alleging infringement of his rights by the employer.

Can't Refer Dispute To Arbitration Unless There Is A Clear, Unequivocal Denial Of A Right: Kerala High Court

'Very Serious Allegations': Kerala High Court Dismisses Plea Alleging Corruption In Judges To Secure Govt. Posts After Retirement

Case Title: Abdul Jaleel v. Cabinet Principal Secretary & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 316

The High Court recently dismissed a plea seeking the establishment of a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court in all the High Courts in the country to specifically hear the cases of the poor and the destitute. The Division Bench of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly dismissed the plea holding it was not inclined to grant the reliefs sought for apart from observing that the petitioner had raised serious allegations against the judiciary.

Will Not Disrupt Functioning Of KSRTC: Trade Unions Before Kerala High Court In Plea Alleging Delay In Salary Disbursement

Case Title: R. Baji v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation Ltd.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 317

The Kerala State Transport Employee Association informed the High Court that all strikes and disruptive activities on the premises of the KSRTC and its offices will be immediately ceased and that they will not disrupt the functioning of the KSRTC. Justice Devan Ramachandran was hearing the plea moved by the KSRTC employees alleging that they were not being paid salary promptly when it observed that the situation could only be remedied if the State government participated in the matter.

Is A Statement Recorded U/S 164 CrPC A Public Document? Kerala High Court Appoints Amicus Curiae In Saritha Nair's Plea

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

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 318

The High Court appointed an amicus curiae to assist the court to decide the legal question of whether a statement recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC is a public document. Justice Kauser Edappagath appointed the amicus curiae in 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 gold smuggling case.

No Interference U/A 227 Unless Lower Court Committed Manifest Error Or Decision Is Against Settled Principles Of Law: Kerala High Court

Case Title: K.V Shiraz v. Binny Emmatty

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 319

The High Court recently allowed a petition seeking to set aside an order passed by the Rent Control court finding that the lower court had committed a manifest error while passing the impugned order. The Division Bench of Justice Anil K Narendran and Justice P.G Ajithkumar, while considering the question of whether interference of the High Court was warranted on the order passed by the Rent Control Court, observed that it was only necessary if the lower court had committed a manifest error or utilised patently perverse reasoning to arrive at the decision.

Other Developments