Nominal Index [Citations 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 314 - 390]Bharat Petroleum Corporation & Anr v. Saju A.R & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 314Southern Railway v. M/s Cherian Varkey Construction Co. Pvt Ltd, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 315Abdul Jaleel v. Cabinet Principal Secretary & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 316R. Baji v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation Ltd, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 317Saritha S. Nair...
Nominal Index [Citations 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 314 - 390]
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
K.V Shiraz v. Binny Emmatty, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 319
Vasu Kallayi v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 320
Cheshire Tarzan v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 321
State of Kerala v. XXX 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 322
XXX v. State Of Kerala & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 323
Sathy & Ors v. Dileep I.S & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 324
Ansar Najeeb & Ors v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 325
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
Cochin University of Science and Technology v. Dr P. V. Sasikumar 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 339
Dhanya & Anr v. State of Kerala & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 340
R Baji v Kerala State Road Transport Corporation & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 341
Jeyaprabha R. v. CBI & connected matters, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 342
M/s Holmarc Opto Mechatronics (P) Ltd v. Secretary, Kalamassery Municipality & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 343
Sivalal v. State of Kerala and connected matters, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 344
Martin @ Jinu Sebastian and Anr. V. State of Kerala, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 345
State of Kerala & Ors. v. Manager & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 346
Arshom P.M v. State of Kerala & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 347
Government of Kerala V. Waves Electronic (P) Ltd, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 348
Monson Mavunkal v. State of Kerala & Anr, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 349
Kerala State Co-operative Bank Ltd v. S. Viswanathamallan & Anr, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 350
Sreejith T.R v. State of Kerala, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 351
Kerala Christian Professional College Management & Ors v. State of Kerala & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 352
Case Title: M. Baburaj v. State of Kerala, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 353
Ibrahim v. Regional Transport Authority & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 354
State of Kerala v. P. Gopalakrishnan alias Dileep & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 355
Y v. Union of India & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 356
Suo Motu v. State of Kerala & Others 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 357
Elappully Erancheri Jama-Ath Palli & Anr v. Mohammed Haneef & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 358
Aby Thomas v. Director General of Police & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 359
Sanalkumar v. City Police Commissioner, Kollam, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 360
N. Vanaja @ Vanaja Nagendra and anr. v. Bhanumathy and others 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 361
State of Kerala & Anr v. K.S Govindan Nair 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 362
Bunker Partner OU v. MV MAIA-1 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 363
Prakash O.S v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 364
T.P Nandakumar v. State of Kerala & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 365
Shibu L.P v. Neelakantan & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 366
Ameen Saleem & anr. v. State of Kerala & ors. 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 367
X v. Union of India & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 368
Arsho P.M v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 369
X v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 370
K. Chathu Achan v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 371
Kizhakkambalam Pachakkari Karshaka Sangham & Ors v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 372
XXX v. Registrar of Births and Dead Pathanamthitta Municipality and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 373
Shan S & Anr. v. Marriage Officer 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 374
NTPC v. Aishwarya Mohan, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 375
Nimal James & Ors v. State of Kerala & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 376
R. Karthik v. State of Kerala & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 377
KSRTC & Ors. v. K. Venu Kumar, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 378
XXXX v. State of Kerala and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 379
MES Dental College v. Shahana P.S & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 380
Gulam Rasul v. State of Kerala & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 381
Sooraj V. Sukumar v. State of Kerala & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 382
XXX v. State of Kerala, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 383
Shan S & Anr. v. Marriage Officer, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 384
Smitha M.G v. State of Kerala and Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 385
Muhammed Rafi v. Satheesh Kumar M.V, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 386
XXX v. State of Kerala, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 387
Anamika v. State of Kerala and Others, 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 388
Bilal S & Anr v. Passport Officer & Anr, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 389
Alex G. Muricken v. Murickens Marketing System LLP & Anr, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 390
Judgments/Orders This Month
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.
Case Title: Southern Railway v. M/s Cherian Varkey Construction Co. Pvt Ltd
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 315
The High Court has held that the cause of action giving a party the right to refer a dispute to arbitration only accrues when there is a clear and unequivocal denial of a right by one party by the other. Holding so, a Division Bench of Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S Sudha dismissed the appeal moved by Southern Railway challenging the decision of the Additional District Court.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Case Title: Vasu Kallayi v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 320
The Kerala High Court recently observed that the primary cause of cases stockpiling under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 was the ignorance of law and its developments through judicial decisions. Justice P.V Kunhikrishnan thereby set aside orders passed by the Local Level Monitoring Committee and by the Revenue Division Officer, citing unsustainability under the law, while calling the petition a classic example of such ignorance.
Case Title: Cheshire Tarzan v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 321
The Kerala High Court has directed the Union Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution to pass an appropriate order on the issue of deliberate dereliction of duty by the Inspector Station House Officer, in obeying the mandates of the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950. A Division Bench of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly noted that the matter was pending consideration before Ministry, before directing the respondents to reach a logical conclusion on the matter without delay.
Case Title: State of Kerala v. XXX
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 322
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday allowed a petition moved by the Crime Branch challenging the order of the Ernakulam Additional Special Sessions Court which rejected its petition to forward the memory card allegedly containing the visuals of the crime in the 2017 actor sexual assault case for forensic examination. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas accordingly set aside the trial court's order finding that the prosecution only wanted to ascertain certain details that it assumes to be of relevance in the investigation, and not initiate any action.
Case Title: XXX v. State Of Kerala & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 323
The Kerala High Court last week observed that the delay in reporting sexual offences should not be viewed as strictly as in other offences and that it would only become fatal in a case where the authenticity of the prosecution version is uncertain. Justice Kauser Edappagath remarked that this was so because, in a traditional society like ours, it was not reasonable to disbelieve the incident merely because there was a delay in filing the complaint.
Case Title: Sathy & Ors v. Dileep I.S & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 324
The Kerala High Court on Friday while allowing an original petition, held that the limitation period for filing motor accident claims as per Section 166(3), which was introduced by Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act 2019, only has a prospective effect. Justice Amit Rawal remarked that otherwise, with the stroke of the amendment, the right available to the injured and the claimants of the deceased person would be taken away.
Kerala High Court Grants Bail To 31 Persons Accused Of Raising Provocative Slogans During PFI Rally
Case Title: Ansar Najeeb & Ors v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 325
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday granted bail to 31 accused arrested for allegedly raising provocative slogans to destroy communal harmony and criminally intimidating large sections of the society by threatening to annihilate certain groups in a recent rally conducted by the Popular Front of India (PFI) in Alappuzha. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, while allowing the bail application, observed that the investigation was almost complete and that they had been in detention for over a month and the continued detention of the petitioners will not serve any further purpose, despite two accused remaining at large.
Case Title: Akhil P.S v. Director General of Police & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 326
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday granted emergency leave to a man undergoing imprisonment to attend the religious rites following his brother's death under special circumstances since he was not permitted to attend the funeral. Justice Ziyad Rahman A. A observed that although Rule 400(1)(i) of Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Rules only extends the benefit of emergency leave to attend a funeral ceremony and not for religious rites, the facts and circumstances of the case entitled the convict to emergency leave.
Case Title: State of Kerala & Anr v. Dr. K. Mohamed Akbar & Ors. and connected matters
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 327
The Kerala High Court on Monday set aside the order of the State Administrative Tribunal that directed the State government to enhance the retirement age of doctors in the AYUSH department to 60 years as done for doctors in the Health Department, citing that this was a state policy. A Division Bench of Justice A.K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P thereby directed the State to take a decision on the same expeditiously.
CPC | Counter Claim In A Suit Need Not Be Headed By Cause Title: Kerala High Court
Case Title: Bijoy v. Gopinathan & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 328
The Kerala High Court recently held that there is no stipulation under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) or the Civil Rules of Practice of the State that counter-claims should be headed by a cause title. Justice C.S Dias held so after examining Order VII Rule 1 and Order VIII Rule 6A of CPC and Rules 11 and 15 of the Civil Rules.
Case Title: Jibin Joseph v. Union Territory of Lakshadweep & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 329
The Kerala High Court recently ruled that a Magistrate Court is bound to apply its mind while exercising the powers conferred to it under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Justice Kauser Edappagath stated that while taking cognizance of offences or ordering an investigation into any cognizable case, courts should not merely forward all complaints they receive like a post office. As such, it was emphasised that the powers under Section 156(3) cannot be exercised casually or mechanically but are required to be exercised judiciously.
Case Title: State of Kerala v. DR.JOHN PANICKER
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 330
The Kerala High Court has opined that the power of the government to make or amend laws determining the service conditions of its employees cannot confer them the power to apply such laws differently to similarly situated persons. The Division Bench of Justice Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias CP observed that allowing the government to do so would be violative of all cannons of equality enshrined in the Constitution of India.
Case Title: Faizal Kulappadam @ Faizal N v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 331
The Kerala High Court on Monday directed the Education Department to install drop boxes in all schools in the State for students to submit their grievances and concerns anonymously. A Division Bench of Chief Justice S Manikumar and Justice Shaji P Chaly issued the order finding that circulars issued by the government in this regard had not been implemented in all schools.
Case Title: C Abdul Aziz & Ors. v Chembukandy Safiya & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 332
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday observed that a partition deed executed by a Muslim mother on behalf of her minor children acting as their guardian is not valid going by the precedents of the Supreme Court. The Division Bench of Justice P. B Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S Sudha observed that while there was nothing in the personal law prohibiting the same, it was bound by the precedents of the Supreme Court which have established that the Muslim mother cannot be the guardian of her minor child's person or property except for movable property.
Case Title: Akhil M v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 333
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday refused to interfere with the transfer order of a CISFofficial of the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (BPCL) citing that it was made for administrative reasons. Justice Anu Sivaraman added that it would not be justified to interfere with the same particularly since it was the transfer of a member of a uniformed service when there were no sustainable malafides.
Case Title: Binoy Kurian v. Varkey Joseph
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 334
The Kerala High Court recently, while disposing of two petitions, held that the exemption provided under Section 60(1)(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure is not applicable to a charge decree or decree where there is a statutory charge, over the property. Justice A Badharudeen further opined that there is no reason to differentiate between a charge decree and a decree where a statutory charge is created while considering exemption provided under Section 60(1)(c).
Case Title: Navaneeth N Nath v State of Kerala
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 335
While granting bail to a Central Government Counsel in a sexual assault case, the Kerala High Court held that a subsequent refusal to marry or a failure to lead the relationship into a marriage is not sufficient to constitute the offence of rape even if the partners had indulged in a physical relationship. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas observed that a sexual relationship between two willing adult partners will not amount to rape coming within the purview of section 376 of the IPC unless the consent for sex was obtained by a fraudulent act or misrepresentation.
Also Read: Kerala High Court Allows Bail Plea Moved By CGC Accused Of Sexually Assaulting Colleague
Case Title: University of Calicut v. Mohamed Sajid T & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 336
The Kerala High Court on Thursday held that an employee at the helm of affairs, accused of embezzling money, cannot be reinstated during the pendency of the enquiry and thereby refused to recall the order of suspension. A Division Bench of Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S Sudha added that whether these accusations were baseless or genuine was a matter of enquiry and for that reason, the disciplinary proceedings had to continue uninterrupted without the court's interference.
Case Title: Thomas v. R. Murugasamy
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 337
The Kerala High Court on Thursday, while allowing a motor accident claims appeal, held that in Motor Accident Claims the claimant is entitled to get compensation for 'actual damages', which includes the value of spare parts as well. Justice Badharudeen opined that the claimant is entitled to compensation for the value of spare parts incurred for repairing the vehicle which got damaged as a consequence of the motor accident.
Case Title: Inspector General of Registration & Anr v. Riyasudheen K & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 338
The Kerala High Court recently held that a private organisation cannot use the name of a State in its title, irrespective of the profit or purpose for which it is constituted, even if it is a non-commercial organisation going by the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950 and the corresponding Rules. A Division Bench of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly clarified that the use of name of a particular State is prohibited not only for the purpose of trade or business but also for calling or profession.
Payment Of Gratuity Act| Teachers Come Within The Preview of 'Employee' U/S 2(e): Kerala High Court
Case Title: Cochin University of Science and Technology v. Dr P. V. Sasikumar
Citatiton: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 339
The Kerala High Court on Monday while dismissing a petition held that teachers come within the preview of 'employee' as defined under the Payment of Gratuity Act. Justice Murali Purushothaman further clarified that CUSAT, being an educational institution, is an establishment under section 1(3)(c) of the Act.
Case Title: Dhanya & Anr v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 340
The Kerala High Court ruled that a licence under the Kerala Places of Public Resort Act, 1963 is necessary for starting and functioning a gymnasium in the State as long as the Act remains in force. Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan thereby directed the State to instruct all Municipalities, Corporations and Panchayats to send notices to the gyms in the State functioning without a license within 3 weeks.
Case Title: R Baji v Kerala State Road Transport Corporation & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 341
The Kerala High Court recommended that the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) be updated with modern facilities to restore public faith in the Corporation, thereby augmenting its revenue. Justice Devan Ramachandran suggested that the KSRTC should begin by improving its facilities such as toilets and wash areas and called this process the 'Back to KSRTC movement'.
Advocates' Welfare Fund Scam: Kerala High Court Denies Pre-Arrest Bail To 7 Accused
Case Title: Jeyaprabha R. v. CBI & connected matters.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 342
The Kerala High Court denied anticipatory bail to seven accused in the scam involving misappropriation of over ₹7.5 crores from the Kerala Advocates Welfare Fund. Justice K. Babu refused pre-arrest bail to the accused pointing out that this could tamper with the ongoing investigation in the matter.
Case Title: M/s Holmarc Opto Mechatronics (P) Ltd v. Secretary, Kalamassery Municipality & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 343
The Kerala High Court recently held that undertakings being established or proposed to be established in notified industrial areas shall be exempted from obtaining any type of permits from Municipalities or Grama Panchayats for such construction. Justice Shaji P. Chaly added that such exemption is provided to promote industries in the State and to facilitate an easy mechanism to start such establishments without being encumbered by legal complexities.
Case Title: Sivalal v. State of Kerala and connected matters.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 344
The Kerala High Court acquitted 13 Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) activists who were booked and sentenced by a trial court for the political murder of CPI(M) activist Vishnu. A Division Bench of Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice C. Jayachandran acquitted the workers observing that the prosecution case reeked of a deliberate attempt to tutor witnesses, collect evidence and define a scripted story.
Case Title: Martin @ Jinu Sebastian and Anr. v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 345
The Kerala High Court has held that when there is knowledge to the accused that the act he has done is likely to cause the death of a person and with the said knowledge he does the act and in consequence thereof the person dies, it will fall under Section 304 Part II IPC. Justice A Badharudeen, while distinguishing between offences falling under Section 304A and Section 304 Part II IPC observed that when intent or knowledge is the direct motivating force of the act, Section 304A of IPC has to make room for the graver and more serious charge of culpable homicide.
State Not Obliged To Pay Salary To Teachers Whose Appointments Are Void Ab Initio: Kerala High Court
Case Title: State of Kerala & Ors. v. Manager & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 346
The Kerala High Court ruled that the State government is not obliged to pay salary to teachers who were appointed in violation of the Kerala Education Rules and the Kerala Education Act. A Division Bench of Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S Sudha held that if the appointment defies the law, it is the Manager who is responsible and the Government has no obligation to pay salary to the teacher.
Case Title: Arshom P.M v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 347
The Kerala High Court denied bail to the State Secretary of Students' Federation of India (SFI) who was taken into custody for violation of bail conditions imposed on him. He had allegedly got himself involved in 12 crimes while he was out on bail. Justice Viju Abraham dismissed the bail plea finding that he was not entitled to statutory bail merely because the charge sheet was yet to be filed since the case did not come under the purview of Section 167(2) CrPC.
Case Title: Government of Kerala V. Waves Electronic (P) Ltd.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 348
The Kerala High Court recently reversed a judgment passed by a single judge bench allowing a ten-year VAT exemption claimed by SEZ unit relying on the Kerala Industrial Policy 2009, applying the principle of promissory estoppel as per the ratio of Nestle India Ltd. and Llyod Electric and Engineering Ltd. A Division Bench of Justice S. V. Bhatti and Justice Basant Balaji opined that the rule of promissory estoppel cannot be invoked for the enforcement of a promise contrary to law or outside the authority or power of the government or person making that promise.
Kerala High Court Denies Bail To Monson Mavunkal In Sexual Assault Cases
Case Title: Monson Mavunkal v. State of Kerala & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 349
The Kerala High Court dismissed the bail applications moved by infamous fake antique dealer Monson Mavunkal in a batch of cases where several women have accused him of sexually abusing them. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas dismissed the bail application finding find force in the contention of the prosecution that there is a possibility that he may influence the witnesses if released on bail.
Also Read: Kerala High Court Reserves Verdict In Monson Mavunkal's Bail Pleas In Sexual Assault Cases
Case Title: Kerala State Co-operative Bank Ltd v. S. Viswanathamallan & Anr
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 350
The Kerala High Court reiterated that the provision in the Payment of Gratuity Act which enables an employee to opt for better terms of gratuity would prevail over the provision in Kerala State Co-operative Societies Act that limits the amount payable as gratuity. A Division Bench of Justice A.K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P added that when two choices are available, the employee cannot be denied the right to receive those higher benefits.
Kerala High Court Grants Bail To Actor Sreejith Ravi In POCSO Case With Conditions
Case Title: Sreejith T.R v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 351
The Kerala High Court granted bail to Malayalam actor Sreejith Ravi in a POCSO case registered against him for allegedly exhibiting nudity in front of children. After perusing the records and medical certificates, and having regard to the fact that he has been in custody since last week, Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas allowed the bail application noting that his continued detention was not warranted.
Case Title: Kerala Christian Professional College Management & Ors v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 352
The Kerala High Court recently asked the State to remit the Scholarship amount to the students with an Annual Family Income below Rs.2,50,000/- into their designated accounts and to ensure that this amount is paid by them into the accounts of the Colleges/Managements within a one week or so. Justice Devan Ramachandran also clarified that the amount shall be directly remitted to the account of the management or the college for students with a larger family income.
Production Of Succession Certificate Mandatory When Decree Holder Dies Only If Decree Amount Comes Under 'Debts' Or 'Securities': Kerala High Court
Case Title: M. Baburaj v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 353
The Kerala High Court held that the production of a succession certificate is mandatory as per Section 214(1)(b) of the Succession Act when the decree-holder dies in cases where the decree amount comes under the category 'debts' or 'securities'. Justice A Badharudeen further added that when the decree-holder dies after the deposit has been made, an exemption is made for the production of a succession certificate.
Case Title: Ibrahim v. Regional Transport Authority & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 354
The Kerala High Court last week cautioned its Registry of disciplinary action if it cleared any document or file that was illegible or if the words are not printed in sufficiently large font. Justice Amit Rawal held so while considering a petition where the font used in a document was as small as '8'. The Judge found that the document was illegible and that the Registry should not have accepted and produced before the Court the hard copy of such documents.
Case Title: State of Kerala v. P. Gopalakrishnan alias Dileep & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 355
The Kerala High Court on Monday disposed of the plea filed by the prosecution seeking 3 more weeks' time to conclude further investigation in the 2017 Actor Assault Case. Justice Kauser Edappagath denied this request of the Crime Branch, but considering the submission made by the Director General of Prosecution, granted time till 22.07.2022 to submit the Final Report. Initially, the Court had asked the prosecution to conclude the investigation by 15th July.
Kerala High Court Allows Termination Of Minor Rape Survivor's 24 Weeks Pregnancy
Case Title: Y v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 356
The Kerala High Court recently came to the assistance of a minor rape survivor by paving the way for her to undergo medical termination of her pregnancy which was a result of the sexual assault committed on her. In case the newborn is born alive, Justice V.G Arun directed the State and its agencies to assume full responsibility and offer medical support and facilities to the child, if the petitioner was not ready to assume responsibility.
Kerala High Court Initiates Suo Motu Case On Collapse Of Temple Roof During Ceremony
Case Title: Suo Motu v. State of Kerala & Others
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 357
The Kerala High Court recently initiated suo motu proceedings to look into the collapse of a portion of the concrete on the top of the Anakkottil in Valiyakalavoor Temple that fell down during the 'choroonu' ceremony injuring three people, including the mother of the baby. A Division Bench consisting of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice P. G. Ajithkumar initiated the suo motu proceeding on the basis of a news item in the Malayalam daily, Mathrubhumi, about three devotees from a family sustaining injuries at the Valiyakalavoor Temple, which is under the management of the Travancore Devaswom Board, when a portion of the roof of the temple collapsed. The Court pulled up on the Devaswom Board for its failure to perform its statutory duty.
Case Title: Elappully Erancheri Jama-Ath Palli & Anr v. Mohammed Haneef & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 358
The Kerala High Court recently ruled that every Muslim has the right to offer prayers in any mosque or bury their dead bodies in a public khabarsthan and that this cannot be obstructed merely because they belong to a different sect. A Division Bench of Justice S.V. Bhatti and Justice Basant Balaji was dealing with a petition filed by a wakf arguing that since some of its members had changed to a different sect, they were not entitled to offer prayers and buried their dead bodies in its property.
Case Title: Aby Thomas v. Director General of Police & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 359
The Kerala High Court recently directed the concerned District Police Chief to expeditiously resolve the grievance of a petitioner who had received a wrong laptop, delivered to him by Flipkart. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A disposed of the petition with a direction to the Kottayam Police Chief to take up the petitioner's complaint and redress the matter within a period of one month.
Gross Abuse Of Court's Process: Kerala High Court Dismisses Two Petitions With Exemplary Cost
Case Title: Sanalkumar v. City Police Commissioner, Kollam and others and, Sumith v. Shareef S and others.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 360
The Kerala High Court recently dismissed two petitions and imposed exemplary costs of Rs.25,000/- each to be paid to the Kerala High Court Bar Association for gross abuse of the court's process. Justice Amit Rawal observed that the sole purpose of both petitioners was to stall the criminal proceedings pending in lower courts and therefore opened that they deserve to be dismissed with exemplary costs.
Kerala High Court Imposes Cost On Litigants For Securing Favourable Judgment By Producing False Memo
Case Title: N. Vanaja @ Vanaja Nagendra and anr. v. Bhanumathy and others
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 361
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday set aside a judgment obtained by producing a fake memo showing service of notice and imposed Rs 10,000 on the litigants who produced the fake memo. Justice A Badharudeen, while considering the review petition, opined that it is settled law that once it is established that the order was obtained by a successful party by practising fraud, it is vitiated, and such order cannot be held legal.
Case Title: State of Kerala & Anr v. K.S Govindan Nair
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 362
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday ruled that a Selection Committee constituted to nominate a suitable candidate for a post can shortlist qualified applicants to trim down the number of such eligible applicants, provided the criteria for shortlisting do not eliminate candidates for not having qualifications that were never notified earlier. A Division Bench of Justice A.K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P was dealing with a petition that questioned the validity of a shortlisting procedure adopted by the State Selection Committee for the post of Chairman of the Kerala State Pollution Control Board.
Case Title: Bunker Partner OU v. MV MAIA-1
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 363
The Kerala High Court on Monday directed a Russian vessel, MV MAIA-1 to be detained at the Cochin Port Trust for non-payment of dues to an Estonian firm, Bunker Partner OU. Justice Sathish Ninan issued the ex-parte order against the Russian cargo ship after being prima facie satisfied that the arrest was warranted in this case.
Case Title: Prakash O.S v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 364
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday held that once paddy land is converted in due compliance with statutory mandates, the Tahsildar has to reassess the tax and make necessary entries in the Revenue records as per Section 27C of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act. Justice N. Nagaresh found that the land reclaimed by the petitioner was admittedly paddy land and therefore, he cannot be forced to treat it as unnotified land or to approach the Revenue Divisional Officer for that matter.
Case Title: T.P Nandakumar v. State of Kerala & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 365
The Kerala High Court on Thursday granted bail to journalist T.P Nandakumar who was arrested last month on charges of verbally abusing a former woman employee and allegedly forcing her to make a vulgar video. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A allowed the appeal moved by the journalist primarily because the complaint submitted by the victim did not contain details of several allegations.
Case Title: Shibu L.P v. Neelakantan & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 366
The Kerala High Court on Thursday held that evidence of the power of attorney holder is not credible unless they possess due knowledge of the transaction. Justice A. Badharudeen observed that a complainant alleging offence under Section 138 should make a specific assertion regarding the knowledge of the power of attorney holder in such transactions. The Judge added that a power of attorney holder who had no knowledge regarding the transactions cannot be examined as a witness in the case.
Kerala High Court Extends Last Date To Apply For Plus One Course In State Board Till 22nd July
Case Title: Ameen Saleem & anr. v. State of Kerala & ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 367
The Kerala High Court on Thursday extended till next hearing the interim order passed in the petition seeking an extension of the last date to apply for Plus One Course in the State Stream till mark sheets of the CBSE Class X Examination are published. Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V observed that a delay of a day or two cannot be a reason to deprive the students of the State of Kerala who have been pursuing their education in the CBSE stream till Standard X, if they wish to migrate to the State Board.
Case Title: X v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 368
The Kerala High Court on Thursday expressed its concerns over the glaring absence of adequate sex education in schools amid the rising number of child pregnancies, which are, unfortunately, often a result of sexual abuse by close relatives. Justice V.G. Arun thereby asked the authorities to reconsider the sex education and safe use of the internet and social media being imparted at the schools in the State.
Kerala High Court Grants Interim Bail To SFI Leader For Appearing In Exam
Case Title: Arsho P.M v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 369
The Kerala High Court on Friday granted interim bail to 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 granted interim bail to Arsho P.M till 3rd August, permitting him to appear for his exams conducted by the MG University which are scheduled from 23rd July till 3rd August.
Case Title: X v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 370
In a significant development, the Kerala High Court has notified a list of directions to the State authorities to set up a gender-neutral victim protection protocol to ensure that all survivors of sexual abuse are empowered and encouraged to approach law enforcement agencies. Justice Devan Ramachandran issued the directions to secure the effective execution of the mechanisms already established for the benefit of the survivors such as the toll-free number 112, 24/7 access to crisis centres and legal support. The Judge also commented on the depth and complexity of the distress of a sexual assault survivor, while adding that it is to be defined.
Case Title: K. Chathu Achan v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 371
The Kerala High Court observed that mere sympathizing with a political party cannot be a disqualification for appointment as non-hereditary of a temple. There is clear distinction between sympathizing with a political party and indulging in active participation in the activities of the party, the bench comprising Justices Anil K. Narendran and P.G. Ajithkumar observed while it dismissed a petition filed by a hereditary trustee of the Sree Emoor Bhagavathy Temple challenging the notification issued by the Commissioner of Malabar Devaswom Board that invited applications to the post of non-hereditary trustees at the temple.
Kerala Public Buildings Act | Secretary Of Panchayat Empowered To Act As Estate Officer: High Court
Case Title: Kizhakkambalam Pachakkari Karshaka Sangham & Ors v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 372
The Kerala High Court on Friday held that the Secretary of a Grama Panchayat is empowered to act as Estate Officer under the Kerala Public Buildings (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1968. Justice N. Nagaresh accordingly dismissed a petition alleging that the occupants of a shopping complex were not afforded an opportunity of hearing before the Estate Officer before they were served with an eviction notice.
Case Title: XXX v. Registrar of Births and Dead Pathanamthitta Municipality and ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 373
In a significant order, Kerala High Court on Tuesday, while allowing a Writ Petition held that a person has the right to not specify the name of their father in identity documents. The Court passed the order recognising the agonies faced by children of unwed mothers and rape victims. Referring to the Mahabharata charcater Karna, the Court observed in the judgment "We want a society with no such characters like "Karna," who curses his life because of the insult he faced for not knowing the whereabouts of his parents".
Kerala High Court Allows Bride To Appear Through Online Mode For The Solemnization Of The Marriage
Case Title: Shan S & anr. v. Marriage Officer
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 374
The Kerala High Court recently in a Writ Petition allowed one of the parties to appear through online mode for the solemnization of their marriage before the Marriage Officer. Justice V.G. Arun allowed the second petitioner, who is a Canadian citizen with an Overseas Citizen of India Card to appear before the Marriage office in online mode for the solemnization of their marriage, however, this is subject to certain conditions.
CLAT-PG Test Ranking Can Be Used To Select NTPC Law Officers: Kerala High Court
Case Title: NTPC v. Aishwarya Mohan
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 375
The Kerala High Court on Monday held that the condition mandating applicants to clear CLAT for applying to the post of Assistant Law Officer in National Thermal Power Corporation Limited (NTPC) is lawful. A Division Bench of Justice A.K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. thereby allowed the appeal preferred by NTPC against the decision of a Single Judge which held that such a condition was violative of Article 16 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the Single Judge decision has been set aside.
Case Title: Nimal James & Ors v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 376
The Kerala High Court directed the State government to clarify how a student belonging to the Below Poverty Line category can be asked to pay tuition fees at a self-financing college, even if it was a subsidised rate. Justice Devan Ramachandran also asked the State to respond to how such students can be protected now that they have been stripped of the scholarship scheme that was previously available to them.
Case Title: R. Karthik v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 377
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday held that a person born in a particular community cannot be denied community certificate merely for the reason of change in his residence or because his mother and wife belong to another community. Justice VG Arun opined that to determine the community status of a person, enquiry must be conducted about the caste to which the applicant is born and how he was brought up and the mere fact that he changed residence or married a belonging to another caste, are not determining factors.
Case Title: KSRTC & Ors. v. K. Venu Kumar and connected matters
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 378
The Kerala High Court ruled that parties should be offered a hearing before a recovery proceeding as per principles of natural justice, even if a statute does not provide for the same since such proceedings can have civil and pecuniary consequences. A Division Bench of Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice C.S. Dias thereby dismissed the argument of Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) that before the Corporation finds that excess payments are made, the employees need not be heard as there is no statutory provision mandating the same.
Case Title: XXXX v. State of Kerala and others
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 379
The Kerala High Court while allowing a pre-arrest bail application, observed that in matters of alleged sexual offences, especially against minor victims, the courts must be sensitive to the plight of the victims; however, that does not mean that the allegations ought to be accepted as the gospel truth in every case. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas cautioned the courts about false allegations to achieve ulterior objectives and observed that tutoring a witness by the parents even while considering an application for bail cannot be ignored.
Case Title: MES Dental College v. Shahana P.S & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 380
The Kerala High Court on Monday held that as long as the centralized admission process was not complete, a candidate who attempted the Kerala Engineering, Architecture, Medical and Allied Courses (KEAM) exam is not only entitled but also bound to accept the higher options in the stream. A Division Bench of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly thereby directed MES Dental College to refund the amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- remitted by the petitioner towards liquidated damages as per the KEAM Prospectus.
Police Officers Entitled To Use Necessary Force To Arrest Fleeing Accused: Kerala High Court
Case Title: Gulam Rasul v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 381
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday ruled that police officers are entitled to use necessary force to arrest an accused while discharging their official duty, particularly when they are pursuing a fleeing accused. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas also added that while using such force, if any injury is caused to the accused, it does not mean that the officer was not acting in discharge of his duty.
Case Title: Sooraj V. Sukumar v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 382
The Kerala High Court denied pre-arrest bail to a YouTuber who allegedly insulted a woman belonging to a Scheduled Tribe through an interview published on social media on the ground that a prima facie case under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act was made out against him. In a notable observation, Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas ruled that the digital presence of the victim through the internet is sufficient to qualify as 'public view' as contemplated under Section 3 of the Act.
Case Title: XXX v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 383
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday held that an accused has every right to confront a witness with a document during the cross-examination of such witness before the court, especially if such document is a previous statement given by the same witness. Justice Kauser Edappagath added that it was not necessary to produce the document in advance before the court and that such a mandate would deprive the element of surprise involved in the same.
Case Title: Shan S & Anr. v. Marriage Officer
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 384
The Kerala High Court recently ruled that Indian diplomatic officers in non-Apostille countries are empowered to administer oath, take affidavits and do notarial acts as per Section 3 of the Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Oaths and Fees) Act. Justice V.G. Arun added that such oath, affidavit and notarial act administered, sworn or done by or before any such diplomatic officer shall be effectual as if duly administered, sworn or done by or before any lawful authority in the State.
Case Title: Smitha M.G v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 385
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday, while allowing a writ appeal, observed that the Court exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution could not refrain from granting a relief to which a party is entitled, merely for the reason that a specific relief had not been sought in petition. A Division Bench consisting of Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice C. S. Sudha observed, "Merely for the reason that a specific relief has not been sought in the writ petition, it is not an impediment for the court exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution to grant a relief which a party is entitled to."
Case Title: Muhammed Rafi v. Satheesh Kumar M.V
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 386
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday ruled that the State and the police cannot use their power to arrest an individual as a punitive tool or a means to mete out harassment and that they have the duty to observe the safeguards provided under Section 41 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). A Division Bench of Justice A.K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P ordered so in a petition alleging arrest against the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v State of Bihar.
Case Title: XXX v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 387
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday released on bail a man accused of sexually assaulting his student over a span of eight years, finding that he had been in judicial custody for over a month. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas observed that although prima facie there was evidence showing that the petitioner was involved in the crime, his continued incarceration was not necessary for the case.
Case Title: Anamika v. State of Kerala and Others.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 388
The Kerala High Court, on Friday, while passing an interim order in a Writ Petition, observed that in sporting events, in the absence of a separate category for transgender persons, they must be permitted to participate in their chosen category. Justice V G Arun, observed that transgender persons are having equal rights to participate in competitions, and in the absence of a separate category, they should be permitted to participate in their chosen category.
Case Title: Bilal S & Anr v. Passport Officer & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 389
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday passed an interim order dissuading lawyers from filing statements on instruction under the guise of reply or counter affidavit to a petition unless it is an affidavit duly verified by the authorised officer. While ruling that the practice of filing statements by a lawyer is not provided under the High Court Rules and Regulations, Justice Amit Rawal also cautioned the Registry of disciplinary action if any of its staff were found accepting such statements from lawyers.
Case Title: Alex G. Muricken v. Murickens Marketing System LLP & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 390
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday held that cases pending before commercial courts in the State as on 18.03.2022 which have a pecuniary value less than Rs.10 lakh shall continue before the commercial courts. Justice A. Badharudeen observed that a transfer of such pending cases was not necessary since the Government Order increasing the pecuniary limit of commercial courts did not communicate the need for the same.
Other Significant Developments
'Approach AFT' : Kerala High Court Refuses To Entertain Plea Challenging Agnipath Scheme
Case Title: Abymon Varghese & Ors v. Union of India & Ors.
23 candidates who have cleared the physical and medical tests for the Indian Army in 2021 have approached the Kerala High Court against the Centre's Agnipath recruitment scheme for armed forces. However, a Division Bench of Justice A.K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohmmed Nias C.P disposed of the petition as not maintainable suggesting that the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) is the appropriate forum to decide the challenge.
Can CLAT-PG Test Ranking Be Used To Select NTPC Law Officers? Kerala High Court Reserves Judgment
Case Title: NTPC v. Aishwarya Mohan
The Kerala High Court on Monday heard the appeals filed against the decision of a Single Judge, which held that the condition mandating applicants to clear CLAT for applying for the post of Assistant Law Officer in the National Thermal Power Corporation Limited (NTPC) was violative of Article 16 of the Constitution of India. The appeals, moved by the NTPC and the writ petitioner respectively, were heard by a Division Bench of Justice A. K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P.
Bail Granted To PC George In Sexual Assault Case Challenged Before Kerala High Court
A prime accused in the solar panel scam has moved the Kerala High Court challenging the bail granted to former MLA PC George in the sexual harassment case. PC George was arrested by the Cantonment Police from Thiruvananthapuram on Saturday based on a complaint alleging that he sexually harassed the accused in the solar panel case at a guest house. Upon reaching the guest house, it is alleged that George advanced certain unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures to the de facto complainant.
Case Title: Suo Motu v. State of Kerala & Ors.
While adjudicating upon a suo motu case regarding the increasing number of road accidents, the Kerala High Court on Monday asked the State government to file a report on the incident where a tourist bus caught fire after firecrackers were set off on its roof before venturing on a college excursion last month. A Division Bench of Justice Anil K Narendran and Justice P.G Ajith Kumar listed the matter urgently after a news report of the incident caught its eye. The Court also condemned the continued flouting of road safety regulations despite repeated orders for their strict implementation.
Actor Sreejith Ravi Moves Kerala High Court Seeking Bail In POCSO Case
Malayalam actor Sreejith Ravi has approached the Kerala High Court seeking bail in a POCSO case registered against him for allegedly exhibiting nudity in front of children. The prosecution case is that on July 4, the applicant flashed his private parts and proceeded to exhibit and caress the same in front of two girls at a park. The Thrissur West Police registered a case and arrested the actor after the girls, aged 9 and 14 respectively, filed a complaint on the same.
Case Title: Navaneeth N Nath v State of Kerala
The Kerala High Court on Thursday orally observed that rape charges will not be attracted against a man merely because the relationship between him and a woman turned sour over time while reserving its verdict in the bail application moved by a Central Government Counsel in a sexual assault case. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas remarked that the relationships have evolved over time and that young adults these days have a different outlook on romantic relationships but that the fact that the relationship did not work out will not attract the offence of rape.
The Kerala High Court on Thursday pulled up the Kochi Corporation and the Public Works Department over their failure to take adequate action for repairing the faulty roads in the city even after delivering repeated directions. Justice Devan Ramachandran observed that most of the roads in the city were destroyed after rainfall and that some action had to be taken to repair these faulty roads.
A day ahead of the scheduled release of Prithviraj-starrer Malayalam movie 'Kaduva', the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) has demanded that the name of the protagonist character be modified after it was found relatable to a real person. The CBFC has also directed the insertion of a strong disclaimer at the beginning of the movie to mitigate defamation. This comes a week after the Kerala High Court directed the CBFC to take an independent decision on the objection filed before it which challenged the theatre release of the movie.
The survivor in the 2017 actor sexual assault case has filed an objection before the Kerala High Court against the impleading petition filed by actor Dileep in her plea where she raised serious allegations against the State and the trial court judge, suspecting foul play in the ongoing investigation in the case. In her objection, the survivor has contended that the plea was filed to prevent any interference of the actor in the ongoing investigation and that impleading him in the petition would defeat the entire purpose of the case.
Kerala High Court Directs State To Inform Steps Taken To Complete Revival Of Mullassery Canal
The Kerala High Court directed the Special Government Pleader to inform the court about the steps taken at the behest of the Secretary of the Water Department to complete the revival of Mullassery Canal, including the manner in which the work has to be completed and the additional funds required for the same. Justice Devan Ramachandran opined that any delay in the completion of the canal work would create immeasurable trouble for the citizens, more so because of the fact that the KSRTC bus stand is nearby.
Actor Assault Case| Crime Branch Approaches Kerala High Court Seeking 3 More Weeks To Wind Up Probe
The Crime Branch has moved the Kerala High Court seeking another three weeks extension to conclude the further investigation in the 2017 sexual assault case. The time extension petition has attached a copy of the report received from the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) which discloses compelling evidence suggesting that the memory card allegedly containing the visuals of the crime was accessed three times while it was in the custody of the trial court.
Also Read: Kerala High Court Asks Prosecution To Collect & Submit Cloned Copy Of Memory Card In A Sealed Cover Before Trial Court By Monday
Case Title: G. Vipinan v. Union of India & Ors.
Senior Journalist G. Vipinan has approached the Kerala High Court 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. According to the plea filed through Advocate C. Unnikrishnan, in 2008, the petitioner was brutally attacked and grievously hurt for publishing news against the misappropriation of money by the official of Sales Tax Intelligence. The said official was a close friend of the respondent, and the case was closed against him at the instance of the respondent.
Remarks Against Chief Minister: State Opposes Swapna Suresh's Plea In Kerala High Court To Quash FIR
Case Title: Swapna Prabha Suresh v. State of Kerala & Anr.
The State has filed a statement before the Kerala High Court in the plea moved by Swapna Suresh seeking to quash the FIR registered against her for allegedly spreading false information against MLA K.T Jaleel, Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan and the Government. Swapna Suresh, the prime accused in the infamous gold smuggling case, had revealed to the press that several persons in the administrative higher-ups including the Chief Minister, his wife, his daughter, K.T Jaleel and many others were involved in several anti-social and anti-national activities involving the Consulate while adding that she had deposed the same before the Magistrate.
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday pulled up the Engineers for their failure to repair the potholes on the roads and ordered that if roads are damaged and potholes appear within six months from the issuance of the completion certificate, then the Engineers and the Contractors will be subjected to vigilance inquiry. Justice Devan Ramachandran expressing his distress over the accidents occurring due to the potholes on the roads, opined that the situation would not change unless the Engineers and the Contractors were held made liable for the potholes.
Case Title: Sabarinadhan K.S v. Station House Officer & Ors.
A Kerala court on Monday released on bail State Youth Congress Vice-President K.S. Sabarinadhan in the case related to the recent protest against Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan on a flight at the Thiruvananthapuram airport. Thiruvananthapuram Principal Sessions Judge P.V. Balakrishnan allowed the bail application with conditions finding that custodial interrogation of the petitioner was not required in the case since reports did not reveal any conspiracy as alleged in the case.
Kerala High Court Introduces Paperless Courts For Bail, Tax Matters From 1st August
Kerala High Court, as a part of the first phase in the implementation of paperless courts, has decided to introduce paperless courts in Bail Jurisdiction and Tax matters from 1st August. As per the notice issued on Thursday, paperless courts are being introduced in Bail jurisdiction and Tax matters (Single Bench), and the division bench considering appeals from the said single benches.
Case Title: Treasa K.J. v. State of Kerala R
The Kerala High Court on Thursday reiterated that the rejuvenation of Mullassery Canal in Ernakulam city is to be completed, and resources for it would have to be found by the State government. Justice Devan Ramachandran added that the resources have to be found by the Government from any source it pleases. It is necessary and imperative.
Kerala Court Issues Summons To Sonia Gandhi In Suit By Congress Member Challenging His Suspension
Case Title: Pridhwyraj P v. Sonia Gandhi & Ors.
A court in Kerala recently issued summons to Indian National Congress president Sonia Gandhi to appear in person or through a lawyer on August 3 in a plea filed by a member challenging his suspension from the party. The Kollam Munsiff Court also issued the urgent notice for appearance to Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee (KPCC) President K Sudhakaran as well as District Congress Committee Chief P Rajendra Prasad.
Case Title: Saritha S. Nair v. Union of India & Anr.
The Kerala High Court on Monday reserved its verdict on 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, while hearing the submissions made by the petitioner's counsel that defamatory statements about the petitioner have been made in the S.164 Statement, raised the question as to how the petitioner would know imputations against her had been made in the S.164 statement without reading it.
Case Title: Muralikrishnan v. State of Kerala & connected matters
In a statement filed on Monday, the Railway Board has informed the Kerala High Court that all steps taken in pursuance of land acquisition for K-Rail Silverline are premature since no approval has been granted for the project so far. Through the statement moved the ASG S. Manu, the Railway Board reiterated that it has neither approved nor concurred with the SIA and that the survey conducted by the State Government was under the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act.
Case Title: Biju P. Cheruman v. Election Commission of India & Ors.
A petition has been moved in the Kerala High Court 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. When the matter was taken up on Tuesday, a Division Bench of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly took a prima facie view that Article 173 of the Constitution, which deals with qualification for being an MLA, may not be applicable here.
Case Title: Muralikrishnan v. State of Kerala & connected matters
The State Government on Tuesday assured the Kerala High Court that any activity related to the ongoing SIA conducted in furtherance of its K-Rail project is being done only through the Geo-tagging facility and that no large survey stones are being used for demarcation. Justice Devan Ramachandran while recording this undertaking clarified that this does not mean that the Court has neither permitted nor stopped the SIA in any manner.
Case Title: Asif Azad v. Union of India & Ors.
A Public Interest Litigation filed in the Kerala High Court has sought compensation to the female candidates who were recently forced to remove their innerwear before appearing for the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) in Kollam. While the plea primarily seeks a direction to the Centre to publish a common protocol to conduct examinations in India, the petitioner has also sought a direction to the National Testing Agency (NTA) to re-conduct the exam within two weeks.
Case Title: George Vattukulam v. State of Kerala
The Kerala High Court on Friday called for the status report in the evidence tampering case involving Transport Minister Antony Raju regarding the progress of the trial before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Nedumangad. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A was adjudicating upon a petition seeking expedited trial in the case where the Transport Minister has been accused of tampering with evidence while he was practising as a lawyer.
Case Title: Jose Kuruvinakkunnel v. Union of India & Ors
Prithviraj-starrer Malayalam movie 'Kaduva' faces yet another challenge as a new petition before Kerala High Court alleges that the movie was released in theatres violating court orders. The plea has thereby sought to block the OTT release of the film. Justice V.G Arun on Tuesday admitted the plea and issued notice to the respondents. Meanwhile, reports suggest that the OTT release of the action entertainment has been scheduled for August 4.
Drains Left Uncovered, Grates Missing: Kerala High Court Seeks Response From Kochi Corporation, CSML
Case Title: Pauly Vadakkan v. Corporation of Cochin
The Kerala High Court on Friday directed the Cochin Corporation and Cochin Smart Mission Limited (CSML) to file a report on the missing grating covering the drains on the roads in the city. The matter came to the notice of the Court from a newspaper report in the 'Malayala Manorama' that the gratings were missing on certain roads in Kochi, covering the holes to draw water into the drains, and this is likely to injure pedestrians and motorists, particularly two-wheelers.