Kerala High Court Monthly Digest - June 2023 [Citations: 246- 301]

Muhammed Rafi Kunnulpurayil v. Sub Inspector of Police & Anr., 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 250

Mukesh @ Nandu V State of Kerala, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 251

XXX v. State of Kerala, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 252

Sundaran V. State of Kerala, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 253

Sanu & Anr. v. State of Kerala, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 254

Navas V State of Kerala, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 255

Arumughom Achari Ranganathan Achari & Ors v. Rajamma Sarojam & Ors., 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 256

K. Rajendra Prasad V State Of Kerala, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 257

Satheesh Kumar R V Kerala State Sports Council & Another, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 258

Yeshwanth Shenoy V The Chief Justice High Court of Kerala & Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 259

Sabarinathan v. State of Kerala, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 260

Kerala CBSE Schools Management Association & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Ors., Sarosh P. Abraham v. State of Kerala & Ors.2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 261

Jithin P V State of Kerala, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 262

Jeffin Jose T V The Central Board of Secondary Education, 2023 LiveLaw (2023) 263

Ashok Kumar V. Sankarankutty Pillai 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 264

Ejo P.J. v. Regional Passport Office & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 265

X v. NIL 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 266

Dheera N.G. & Anr. v. Simesh S. and Simesh S. v. Dheeran N.G. & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 267

K.R Santhosh Versus Revenue Divisional Officer 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 268

Mohammed Kabeer Versus Secretary 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 269

Shiny George Ambat V. Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 270

Rajesh @ Malakka Rajesh & Anr. v. State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 271

Kerala Public Service Commission v. Aneera C. & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 272

XXX V State of Kerala, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 273

Thankam v. Remani & Anr., 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 274

Shiji v. The Project Director, National Highway Authority of India & Ors., 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 275

Sumayya Sherin v. Director General of Police & Ors., 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 276

XXX v. XXX, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 277

Navaneeth Mohanan K.P. & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Ors., 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 278

Ashraf Ali v State of Kerala, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 279

Penuel Nexus Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Additional Commissioner Headquarters (Appeals), 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 280

M/S Jatan Constructions Pvt Ltd V. Station House Officer, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 281

K Cheriya Koya V. U T Administration of Lakshadweep, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 282

The Chairman and Managing Director, BSNL & Ors. v. C.R. Valsalakumari & Anr., 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 283

Priya Varghese V Dr. Joseph Skariah, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 284

Jollyamma Joseph @ Jolly V. State Of Kerala, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 285

State of Kerala & Ors. v. Seena M., 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 286

Mohanan V.V State Of Kerala, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 287

XXX. V State of Kerala, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 288

 XXX v Union of India, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 289

Kripesh Krishnan v. State of Kerala & Anr., 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 290

 Naisam V. The Station House Officer Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 291, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 291

Case Title: BRD Securities Ltd V. Union Of India

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 248

The Kerala High Court recently held that the Securities and Exchange Board Of India (SEBI) can delegate the quasi-judicial functions of the Board to its members if the statute permits such delegation. The court noted that Section 19 of the SEBI Act permits delegation of the function and power of the Board to its members, except the powers under under Section 29, being the rule making power of the Board.

A single bench of Justice V G Arun observed that:

“In the Indian context, delegation of quasi-judicial functions is permissible if the statute provides for such delegation. A plain reading of Section 19 of the SEBI Act shows that, all powers and functions of the Board (except the rule making power under Section 29) can be delegated to any member, officer or any other person.”

Kerala High Court Takes Exception To State’s Rejection Of Proposal On Enhancing Retirement Age Of HC’s Meritorious Staff, Orders Fresh Decision

Case Title: Ajith Kumar V.S. & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Ors. and other connected matters

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 249

Taking exception to the State's rejection of a proposal on the enhancement of retirement age of high court staff from 56 to 58, the Kerala High Court remitted the matter back to the state government for a fresh decision on the proposal of the Chief Justice for enhancement of the retirement age of the meritorious employees.

The Registrar General of the High Court on October 25, 2022 had forwarded the proposal of the Chief Justice for enhancement of the age of superannuation of the members of the High Court staff from 56 to 58 years. The proposal had been sent pursuant to a High level meeting between the Chief Justice and the Chief Minister of the State on September 24, 2022. The sub-committee consisting of three judges had suggested enhancement of retirement age, limiting to members with meritorious service and impeccable integrity for which a performance evaluation would have to be done at the age of 56 years.

Additional Chief Secretary of the Government however, in February informed the High Court of the State's inability to accept the proposal since the retirement age of the High Court staff had been fixed at par with that of the Government servants. The State said that since it had not taken any decision to enhance the retirement age of the government servants, the Government would thus not be able to consider the proposal of the Chief Justice favourably.

The Division Bench comprising Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Sophy Thomas, while taking the view that the request of the Chief Justice could only be treated as a proposal for favourable consideration for initiating suitable amendment to the law laid down with respect to the retirement age, observed:

"It is beyond our power to direct the Government to initiate steps for amendment of legislation related to the retirement age. However, at the same time, we also feel that the Government cannot outrightly reject the proposal, merely citing the age of retirement prevailing for government servants".

Kerala High Court Elucidates Mode In Which Accused Must Request Court For Adducing Defence Evidence

Case Title: Muhammed Rafi Kunnulpurayil v. Sub Inspector of Police & Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 250

The Kerala High Court recently addressed the question as to the mode in which an accused ought to request the Court for adducing the defence evidence.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, perused Section 233 Cr.P.C. which stipulates 'Entering Upon Defense', and observed that as per the provision, if the accused applies for the issue of any process for compelling the presence of any witness or the production of any document or thing, the judge shall issue such process, unless he considers, for reasons to be recorded, that such application should be refused on the ground that it is made for the purpose of vexation or delay or for defeating the ends of justice. It thus noted that the action of making a prayer or a request is the meaning to be ascribed to the word ‘applies’ as provided in Section 233 Cr.P.C.

When Application For Anticipatory Bail Is Not Pressed Interim Bail Stands Vacated: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Mukesh @ Nandu V State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 251

The Kerala High Court recently held that a person who was granted interim bail after executing the bail bond cannot rely on the interim bail order to submit that the main bail application has become infructuous. The Court held that as a consequence of the main application being dismissed as not pressed, the interim order granting bail to the petitioner would be vacated and the bail bond executed would cease to exist.

A single bench of Justice A Badharudeen observed,

“It is held that since the petition has been not pressed and dismissed and the interim bail granted stands vacated, the petitioner is relegated back to the date of filing of the anticipatory bail application and it is ordered that the petitioner is not on bail as of now and the police is at liberty to arrest the petitioner and proceed with the investigation in this matter, since the allegations are very serious.”

Nudity Of Female Upper Body Shouldn't Be Regarded As Sexual Or Obscene By Default : Kerala High Court

Case Title: XXX v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 252

The depiction of a woman's naked body should not be regarded as sexual or obscene always, observed the Kerala High Court while discharging a mother from a criminal case pertaining to making a video of her children painting on her semi-nude body.

Taking note of the woman's explanation that the video was made to challenge patriarchal notions and to spread a message against the over-sexualization of the female body, the High Court observed that the video cannot be regarded as obscene. She was chargesheeted for offences under under Sections 13, 14, and 15 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO), Section 67B (d) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act).

Prosecution May Tender Relevant Document In Evidence Even After Submission Of Chargesheet, Veracity To Be Tested During Trial: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Sundaran V. State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 253

The Kerala High Court recently held that there is no embargo on prosecution producing a relevant document even after submission of the final report or charge sheet, with the court’s permission. The Court also held that genuineness and veracity of the documents produced at a later stage could be dealt with during the trial.

A single bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V relied on the Apex Court decision in Central Bureau of Investigation v. R.S. Pai and another [2002 (5) SCC 82] to hold that if a mistake is made by the investigating officer by not producing some document of relevance at the time of submitting the report or the charge sheet, it is open to the investigating officer to produce it with the permission of the court.

The Court also relied on the decision in Criminal Trials Guidelines Regarding Inadequacies and Deficiencies, In Re. v. State of Andra Pradesh and Ors. to hold that the Court may allow the document to be received on file and examine the genuineness and veracity of the document produced at the trial stage:

“the Presiding Officer has to decide objections to questions during the course of the proceeding or failing it at the end of the deposition of the witness concerned. This will result in de-cluttering the record and, what is more, also have a salutary effect of preventing frivolous objections.”

Kerala High Court Grants Bail To Persons Accused Of Assaulting Advocate Commissioner During Local Inspection

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

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 254

The Kerala High Court on Friday granted bail to two persons accused of assaulting a female Advocate Commissioner who had been deputed by the Munsiff's Court at Varkala to execute an Order, and the accompanying Advocate Clerk, during the local inspection.

Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. noted that although the allegations against the petitioners were of serious nature, the petitioners had remained in custody for about 50 days since the date of arrest, and that there has also been substantial progress in the investigation.

"...after taking into account all relevant aspects, including the fact that the petitioners have been under judicial custody since 12.04.2023, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioners subject to appropriate conditions to ensure that they are not influencing the witnesses. This is mainly because, taking note of the period of detention undergone by the petitioners and the stage of the investigation, further incarceration of the petitioners appear to be not necessary," the Court observed.

Misuse Of Liberty By Accused Sufficient Ground For Bail Cancellation: Kerala High Court Reiterates

Case Title: Navas V State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 255

The Kerala High Court recently reiterated that the misuse of the liberty granted to a person released on bail is sufficient ground to cancel the bail.

The Court held as above while considering the challenge to an order of the Special Judge that cancelled the statutory bail granted to a man booked under the NDPS Act for possession of 40.5kgs of Ganja, who was subsequently found in possession of 14.250 kgs of Ganja and 850 gms of Hashish oil and armed weapons with three others.

A single bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V while refusing to interfere with the order of the Special Judge observed:

“As the petitioner has misused the liberty granted to him, the learned Special Judge was well justified in canceling the bail. In that view of the matter, the impugned order does not warrant any interference. However, it is made clear that the above order shall not stand in the way of the petitioner surrendering before the jurisdictional court and seeking regular bail. “

Married Daughter Of Hindu Malayala Kammala Given Stridhan Also Entitled To Share In Self-Acquired Property Of Parent: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Arumughom Achari Ranganathan Achari & Ors v. Rajamma Sarojam & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 256

The Kerala High Court recently held that married daughters belonging to the Hindu Malayala Kammala caste would also be entitled to a share in the self-acquired property of their parent.

The Court in this case was dealing with a case in which it was contended that the females would not be entitled to a share in the property, since as per the custom of the community, they were given in marriage in the customary Kudivaippu form, after giving streedhanam.

It held that any custom governing intestate succession in respect of the self acquired property of a Hindu that was inconsistent with the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (hereinafter, 'Act, 1956'), would be abrogated immediately on coming into force of the statute, by virtue of Section 4.

Gratuity Is To Be Calculated From Date On Which It Became Payable, Not From Date Of Disbursement: Kerala High Court

Case Title: K. Rajendra Prasad V State Of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 257

The Kerala High Court recently observed that the maximum amount of gratuity payable under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 must be calculated from the date on which gratuity became payable and not on the date the amount was actually disbursed.

The Court was considering the plea of a retired Regional Engineer from the Kerala State Housing Board whose DCRG and last month pay was withheld due to audit objections. The Petitioner retired in the year 2002. He had earlier approached the Court and the Secretary of the Board was directed to disburse the withheld amounts. However, according to the petitioner, in light of the 2010 Amendment to the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 under Section 4(3) he is entitled to a maximum gratuity of Rupees Ten Lakhs.

Dismissing the petitioner’s claim a single bench of Justice Murali Purushothaman observed:

“The gratuity is payable to an employee on the termination of his employment. The gratuity payable to an employee shall not exceed the maximum that is notified under the respective enactments as on the date on which the gratuity becomes payable. Even if it is assumed that the petitioner's claim for gratuity was under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, the maximum amount of gratuity payable under the said Act has to be determined with respect to the date on which the gratuity became payable and not on the date on which sanction was accorded for payment of DCRG or the date on which the amount was actually disbursed to him. Therefore, there is no merit in the contention of the petitioner that he is entitled to the maximum gratuity of Rs.10,00,000/- as per section 4(3) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, as amended by Act 15 of 2010.”

[Coach Selection] Kerala High Court Directs Sports Council To Reconsider Application Of Candidate Who Failed To Show Activeness In Sport After 2002

Case Title: Satheesh Kumar R V Kerala State Sports Council & Another

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 258

The Kerala High Court recently directed the State Sports Council to reconsider the application of a candidate under the Khelo India Scheme which was rejected for crossing the prescribed upper age limit, despite a provision in the selection notification of age relaxation for deserving candidates.

The candidate had applied to the post of Swimming Trainer at the District Sports Academy, Pirappancode under the State Level Khelo India Centre Scheme. However, he was not selected to the post, as he was beyond the upper age limit of 40 prescribed for the post and also because he failed to show that he had been active in swimming after the year 2002.

However, the Court noted that the selection notification allowed for relaxation of the age limit if the candidate is an exceptional sportsperson. The Court took specific note of the documents produced by the candidate in his appeal which showed the appellant was active in swimming in recent years. The Court observed that it was only because he failed to produce sufficient supporting documents at the time of the interview that the relaxation of age limit was not considered and his application was rejected.

Can't Direct That A Judge Should Hear Particular Number Of Cases A Day : Kerala High Court Dismisses Lawyer's Plea

Case Title: Yeshwanth Shenoy V The Chief Justice High Court of Kerala & Others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 259

The Kerala High Court on Friday dismissed the petition filed by Adv. Yeshwanth Shenoy alleging that a sitting judge has limited the number of cases listed before the bench to only 20 matters a day, terming it a 'Publicity Interested litigation' to malign judges and the judiciary.

A single bench of Justice P V Kunhikrishnan terming it a frivolous writ petition for popularity and news value, observed:

“Lawyers are the officers of the Court; they are part of the judiciary. If these types of litigations are filed by the lawyers, what is the message that will go to the Society? A lawyer having 21 years of practice filing a writ petition before this Court arraying a Judge of this Court and the Hon'ble Chief Justice as party and making wild allegations without any basis.”

NDPS Act | Mere Virtual Presence Of Accused Not Relevant If He's Not Informed Of Prosecution's Plea For Extension Of Detention: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Sabarinathan v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 260

The Kerala High Court recently held that the decision of the Additional Sessions Judge in a NDPS case, allowing an application for extension of detention and the period of investigation is illegal on account of the failure of the Court to inform the accused as regards the filing of the application and of his right to object to the same.

The Court arrived at the above decision while considering a petition against order allowing Public Prosecutor's application under Section 36A(4) NDPS Act, for the further detention of the accused for a period of 180 days.

Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. observed that the failure of the Court to give oral notice would vitiate the entire proceedings.

"The mere fact that the presence of the accused was secured virtually will not serve any purpose as the accused was not made aware of the filing of the application and there are no materials to suggest that the accused was granted an opportunity to formally raise his objections to the application for extension of detention. In that view of the matter, the impugned order cannot be sustained under law," the Court observed.

Kerala High Court Directs State To Consider Representations By CBSE Schools Association Against Proposed Fee Regulatory Committee

Case Title: Kerala CBSE Schools Management Association & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Ors. and Sarosh P. Abraham v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 261

The Kerala High Court recently directed the State government to consider the representations filed by the Kerala CBSE School Management Association challenging the proposed guidelines framed by the Director of General Education (DGE) for setting up Fee Regulatory Committee and fixing the fee in CBSE/ICSE affiliated schools and unaided schools in the State that follow Kerala State syllabus.

Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan passed the Order and further directed the State to pass appropriate orders in the matter within three months, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.

Accused Has No Vested Right To Seek Joint Trial: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Jithin P V State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 262

The Kerala High Court recently held that an accused has no vested right to seek a joint trial under Section 220 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973. The Court observed that if the offences form part of the the same transaction, they can be tried together in a joint trial.

A single bench of Justice K Babu observed as follows about Section 220 (Trial for more than one offence) of the Cr.PC:

“The Section is an enabling provision. It permits the Court to try more than one offence in one trial. The Court may or may not try all the offences together in one trial. If the Court tries the offences separately, it does not commit any illegality. The accused in a case has no vested right to seek joinder of charges and trial of more offences in one trial.”

KEAM | Kerala High Court Permits Students Wrongly Awarded Class 12th Marks To Upload Corrected Marksheets

Case Title: Jeffin Jose T V The Central Board of Secondary Education

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (2023) 263

The Kerala High Court recently directed the Commissioner of Entrance Examinations to extend the time limit for uploading Plus Two Examination marks of 33 students of St. Paul’s Public School, Thrissur for the KEAM-2023 (Kerala Engineering Architecture Medical) Entrance Exam.

A single bench of Justice P V Kunhikrishnan passed the order after 33 pointed anomaly in the Mathematics internal/practical marks awarded to them by the school. The students had sought a direction for issuance of fresh mark sheets incorporating the correct marks and extension of time limit to upload their marksheets in the portal for the KEAM-2023 entrance examination.

Cheque Issued As Security Will Mature For Presentation On Default When Payment Becomes Due: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Ashok Kumar V. Sankarankutty Pillai

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 264

The Kerala High Court recently held that a cheque issued as security would mature for presentation on default when payment is due. In the event of non-payment of the amount, the recipient of the cheque would be compelled to present the cheque for payment, the Court observed.

A single bench of Justice Sathish Ninan observed

“The very fact that the cheque was issued as security by itself imply that, in the event of non-payment, the security is liable to be enforced. A cheque issued as security would mature for presentation on default when payment is due.”

We Are In AI Era, Documents Issued By Govt Must Conform To Global Standards: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Ejo P.J. v. Regional Passport Office & Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 265

We are in the AI era and government instrumentalities ought to be abreast with emerging global demands in order to have the vision of 'digital India' to materialize, the Kerala High Court observed when faced with the instance of a Police Clearance Certificate issued by an Indian authority being rejected by the authorities in Kuwait.

Single bench of Justice C.S. Dias asked the competent authority under the Ministry of External Affairs to take immediate steps to upgrade the central database and issue the Police Clearance Certificate (PCC) with the barcode, scanned photograph and details of criminal cases of the person concerned.

"We are in the AI era and the 5G revolution. Our Nation is a front-runner in technology. We are striving to make India Digital with initiatives like Indiastack.global, to have a repository of open standards and interoperability principles of key projects implemented under the Digital India Mission like Aadhaar, UPI, Digilocker etc. The certificates issued by the government and statutory authorities have to be internationally accepted, especially when India is a signatory to international conventions and treaties".

Law Does Not Recognise Live-In Relationship As Marriage, Couples Living Together By Virtue Of Agreement Can't Seek Divorce: Kerala High Court

Case Title: X v. NIL

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 266

The Kerala High Court recently held that the law does not recognise a live in relationship as marriage and hence such a relationship cannot be recognised for the purpose of divorce either.

The law only allows parties to divorce if they are married under a recognised form of marriage as per personal law or secular law, the Court observed. So far, marriages entered into between parties through a contract does not have any recognition under law for the purpose of divorce, the Court noted.

A division bench comprising of Justice Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Sophy Thomas observed:

“Marriage as a social institution, as affirmed and recognised in legislation, reflects the social and moral ideals followed in the larger society. The Law is yet to recognise the live-in relationship as marriage. The Law accords recognition only if the marriage is solemnised in accordance with the personal law or in accordance with secular law like the Special Marriage Act.”

Dominant Purpose Of Section 125Cr.P.C. Is To Ensure That Neglected Wife, Child, Parents Are Not Left Helpless: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Dheera N.G. & Anr. v. Simesh S. and Simesh S. v. Dheeran N.G. & Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 267

The Kerala High Court recently enhanced the monthly maintenance allowance of the paralyzed estranged wife and son of a headload worker, on taking note of the latter's neglect and refusal to maintain his wife and child.

The Single Judge Bench of Justice V.G. Arun observed that in such cases, Court ought to be aware of the dominant purpose behind Section 125 Cr.P.C. that stipulates for maintenance, which is that of ensuring that the neglected wife, child and parents are not left in a 'helpless state of distress, destitution and starvation'.

"The court should also be convinced about the existence of the following factors; i) that the respondent has neglected or refused to maintain the claimant. (ii) the claimant do not have the means to maintain herself/himself. (iii) the respondent has sufficient means for maintaining the claimant," it added.

Land To Be Re-assessed For Fixing Basic Tax Rate After Change In The Nature Of Land: Kerala High Court

Case Title: K.R Santhosh Versus Revenue Divisional Officer

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 268

The Kerala High Court has held that as the nature of the land of the petitioner has been permitted to be changed pursuant to the passing of a statutory order under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967, the competent authority is bound to re-assess the rate of basic tax and to make necessary entries in the Basic Tax Register after verifying the veracity and genuineness of the permission obtained.

The bench of Justice N. Nagaresh, while relying on the decision in Mary Abraham v. State of Kerala and others, observed that once an enabling order is passed under Rule 6(2) of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967, permitting conversion of the land, then the earlier entries in the BTR showing the land as Nilam, Paddy Land, etc. will become superfluous and redundant, and the competent Revenue officials like the Tahsildar are obliged under law to make a fresh assessment of the property under Section 6A of the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961.

Kerala High Court Quashes Property Tax Demand Raised Without The Assessment Of The Property

Case Title: Mohammed Kabeer Versus Secretary

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 269

The Kerala High Court has quashed the property tax demand raised without an assessment of the property.

The bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman has observed that the property tax was demanded at the maximum rate possible without considering any relevant aspect, including the age of the building.

IIM Kozhikode Not Instrumentality Of State Under Article 12 Of Constitution; Writ Petition Over Service Dispute Not Maintainable : Kerala High Court

Case Title: Shiny George Ambat V. Union of India

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 270

The Kerala High Court held that IIM, Kozhikode being an autonomous body as per the Indian Institute of Management Act, 2017 and there being no statutory rules with regard to the service conditions of the employees of the institute, the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 cannot be invoked for grant of relief.

A single bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman observed that IIM Kozhikode is an autonomous institution and would not come under the ambit of ‘State’ under Article 12:

“….the contention that the IIM, Kozhikode would answer the definition of State or “Instrumentality of State” under Article 12 of the Constitution of India cannot be accepted. Though the constitution of the governing body appears to be by way of nomination, the institute is specifically intended to be an autonomous institution. It is true that the institute is performing the duty of imparting education in management and carrying out research in the field. However, there is no monopoly intended to be created either by the Statute or by any other means in favour of such institutes in the matter of imparting of management education. The Institute is not a creature of the Statute, since it was a society whose functions were brought under the purview of 2017 Act.”

Magistrate Cannot Impose Condition To Deposit Cash Security While Granting Default Bail: Kerala High Court Reiterates

Case Title: Rajesh @ Malakka Rajesh & Anr. v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 271

The Kerala High Court reiterated the position that while granting statutory bail, the Magistrate cannot impose any other condition for deposit of cash security.

The Single Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. relied upon the Apex Court decision in Saravanan v. State represented by the Sub Inspector of Police wherein it was held that while granting default bail/statutory bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., the condition of deposit of amount cannot be imposed.

The bench noted that the Apex Court had clarified in the said decision that the only requirement for getting the default bail/statutory bail under Section 167(2), Cr.P.C. is that the accused is in jail for more than 60 or 90 days, as the case may be, and within 60 or 90 days, as the case may be, the investigation is not completed and no chargesheet is filed by 60th or 90th day and the accused applies for default bail and is prepared to furnish bail.

Kerala High Court Upholds Tribunal's Order Directing PSC To Provisionally Accept Trans-Woman's Application For Post Confined To Women Candidates

Case Title: Kerala Public Service Commission v. Aneera C. & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 272

The Kerala High Court recently refused to interfere with the interim order issued by the Kerala Administrative Tribunal permitting a trans-woman applicant to submit her application for the post of House Keeper (Female) that had been notified by the Kerala Public Services Commission (Kerala PSC).

The Division Bench comprising Justice Alexander Thomas and Justice C. Jayachandran was of the view that the impugned order was only an ad interim interlocutory order, that was intended to 'preserve the subject matter of the lis'.

Pre-Arrest Bail Plea Though Barred For Offence U/S 376(3) IPC May Be Considered If Material Does Not Prima Facie Attract Offence: Kerala High Court

Case Title: XXX V State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 273

The Kerala High Court recently dismissed the anticipatory bail application filed by a father accused of sexually abusing his minor daughter.

A single bench of Justice Ziyad Rahman observed that as per Section 438 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Code, there is a specific bar against entertaining an application for anticipatory bail where offences Section 376(3) or section 376AB or section 376DA or section 376DB of the Indian Penal Code are alleged. However, the Court may entertain an application for anticipatory bail if the materials placed before the Court does not attract the specific offences under Section 376 IPC:

“As per Sub Section 4 of Section 438 of Cr.P.C., the prohibition in entertaining an application in this regard would come into play when there is an accusation against the accused for having been involved in the offences referred to therein. Therefore, what is relevant is the accusation made against the petitioner. In this case, the allegations constituting the offence under Section 376(3) of IPC can be found in the form of various statements made by the victim before the learned Magistrate. The aforesaid accusations would make out a prima facie case. Thus bar contemplated under Sub Section 4 of Section 438 would come into play.”

Objection Filed After Sale Of Attached Property Barred Under Order 21 Rule 58 CPC, Family Courts Should Be Careful: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Thankam v. Remani & Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 274

The Kerala High Court recently held that an objection cannot be filed after the sale of attached property has been confirmed, as per the bar under proviso (a) to Order 21 Rule 58(1). It thereby cautioned Family Court judges to be more careful, vigilant, and sensitive, while dealing with cases before them.

The Division Bench comprising Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Sophy Thomas passed the Order while finding the Family Court had erroneously entertained and passed its decision on a claim petition that was hit by proviso (a) to Order 21 Rule 58(1).

Order 21 Rule 58(1) stipulates that "Where any claims preferred to, or any objection is made to the attachment of, any property attached in execution of a decree on the ground that such property is not liable to such attachment, the Court shall proceed to adjudicate upon the claim or objection in accordance with the provisions herein contained". Proviso (a) goes on to state in this regard that, "no such claim or objection shall be entertained where before the claim is preferred or objection is made, the property attached has already been sold".

Solatium & Interest As Per Land Acquisition Act Payable For Acquisitions Made Under National Highways Act: Kerala High Court Reiterates

Case Title: Shiji v. The Project Director, National Highway Authority of India & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 275

The Kerala High Court recently rebuked the National Highway Authority of India for 'unnecessarily burdening the courts' with litigations even in the face of settled principles of law.

The Court made the above observation while reiterating that provisions of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 relating to solatium and interest contained in Sections 23(1-A) and (2) and interest payable in terms of Section 28 proviso will apply to acquisitions made under the National Highways Act 1956.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Amit Rawal and Justice C.S. Sudha, observed that in spite of the decision of the Apex Court in Union of India & Anr v. Tarsem Singh & Ors. (2019) which declared as unconstitutional Section 3J of the National Highways Act to the extent it excludes solatium and interest as per Land Acquisition Act to acquisitions done under the NH Act, the NHAI had been challenging the grant of the benefits under the 1894 Act.

Kerala High Court Closes Woman's Habeas Corpus Plea Seeking Release Of Lesbian Partner From Parental Custody

Case Title: Sumayya Sherin v. Director General of Police & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 276

The Kerala High Court closed the habeas corpus petition filed by a 21 year old woman seeking the release of her lesbian partner from the custody of her family.

The Division Bench comprising Justice P.B. Sureshkumar and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen closed the petition on taking note of the petitioner's partner's/ the alleged detenu's statement that she wished to go with her parents.

The petitioner had averred in her plea that both herself and her partner, who belong to Muslim families had been friends since early school days, and had fallen in love with each other by Class 12. It was submitted that they had been residing together for a while. She stated that a lower court had permitted the two women to live together, and added that the parents and brother of the detenu had, on May 30, 2023, forcefully taken her away.

A Mother May Be Morally Bad In Societal Sense But She May Be Good For Child's Welfare: Kerala High Court

Case Title: XXX v. XXX

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 277

The Kerala High Court recently held that in matters of child custody, the welfare of the child alone is to be considered. A mother may be ‘morally bad in the societal sense’, but that does not mean the mother is bad for the welfare of the child, the Court observed.

A division bench comprising Justice Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Sophy Thomas observed,

“In a matter related to the child's custody, the welfare aspect alone has to be considered first. A man or woman may be bad for someone in a contextual relationship, that does not necessarily mean that the person is bad for his/her child. A mother may be morally bad in the societal sense, but that mother may be good for the child as far as the welfare of the child is concerned. The so called morality is created by society based on their own ethos and norms and should not necessarily reflect in a contextual relationship between a parent and child.”

Whether Higher Qualification Would Subsume Lesser Qualification To Be Decided By Employer Based On Its Assessment & Requirements: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Navaneeth Mohanan K.P. & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 278

The Kerala High Court held that whether a higher qualification would subsume a lesser qualification or whether one qualification is equivalent to another are matters to be decided by the employer, based on their assessment and requirements.

The Single Judge Bench of Justice N. Nagaresh observed:

"Whether one qualification is equivalent to another or whether one qualification would subsume another lesser qualification are factors within the realm of academics and in the matter of recruitment to services, it is for the employers to, based on their assessment and requirements, decide such matters. In the absence of patent illegality, perversity or proven legal mala fide, courts will not enter in that arena which is best left to the employer".

[Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act] Externment Order Vitiated If Reasons For Imposing Maximum Period Not Disclosed: High Court

Case Title: Ashraf Ali v State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 279

The Kerala High Court recently observed that when issuing an externment order with the maximum period of punishment for one year under Section 15(1)(a) of Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007, the reasons for passing such an order must be stated.

A division bench of Justice P B Suresh Kumar and Justice C S Sudha observed:

“As Section 15(1)(a) of the Act makes a serious inroad on the personal liberty of citizens guaranteed under Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution, it is an extraordinary power, to be exercised under extra ordinary circumstances. An externment order would certainly deprive a citizen concerned of his fundamental right of free movement throughout the territory of India. At times, it would also prevent a citizen from residing in his house with his family during the subsistence of the order.”

GST Act Has An Inbuilt Mechanism And Impliedly Excludes The Application Of The Limitation Act: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Penuel Nexus Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Additional Commissioner Headquarters (Appeals)

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 280

The Kerala High Court has held that Section 107 of the CGST Act is an inbuilt mechanism and has impliedly excluded the application of the Limitation Act.

The bench of Justice C.S. Dias has observed that the Limitation Act will apply only if it is extended to the special statute. It is also rudimentary that the provisions of a fiscal statute have to be strictly construed and interpreted.

[Kerala Headload Workers Act] Employer Is Free To Engage Skilled Persons Under Section 9A If Special Assistance Is Required: High Court

Case Title: M/S Jatan Constructions Pvt Ltd V. Station House Officer

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 281

The Kerala High Court recently held that if the work of loading and unloading requires assistance of skilled persons, an employer can engage persons with the requisite skill or machinery and this right of the employer is protected under the proviso to Section 9A of the Kerala Headload Workers Act, 1978.

A single bench Justice N Nagaresh observed,

“The proviso to Section 9A would make it clear that in respect of works which require assistance of skilled persons and which are to be done with due diligence or require the aid of machinery, such works can be done by an employer by engaging persons having such skill or by the machinery as the case may be. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the Transformer in question is being unloaded using a machinery. The transportation of machinery requires due diligence and it has to be done by the skilled workers. In view of the proviso to Section 9A, the petitioner has a right to get the work done by using machinery and skilled workers.”

Kerala High Court Says It Has Power To Initiate Disciplinary Proceedings Against District & Subordinate Court Judges In Lakshadweep

Case Title: K Cheriya Koya V. U T Administration of Lakshadweep

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 282

The Kerala High Court held that the control over district court and subordinate courts of the Union Territory of Lakshadweep including the power of disciplinary proceedings against the presiding officers of such courts vests with the High Court of Kerala by virtue of Article 235 of the Constitution.

A single bench of Justice P V Kunhikrishnan held,

“In the light of Article 235 of the Constitution of India, it is declared that the control over the district court and courts subordinate thereto mentioned in Article 235 of the Constitution of India includes the power of disciplinary proceedings against the presiding officers of district court and courts subordinate thereto. Since the district court and subordinate courts in Lakshadweep are under the supervision of the High Court of Kerala, it is declared that the High Court of Kerala has got the power to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the presiding officers of the district court and courts subordinate thereto in the Lakshadweep Islands. I also clarify that the 1st respondent is free to frame Rules in tune with Article 235 of the Constitution of India, if necessary.”

Mother Can Avail Child Care Leave For Third Child If It Wasn't Availed For Elder Children: Kerala High Court

Case Title: The Chairman and Managing Director, BSNL & Ors. v. C.R. Valsalakumari & Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 283

The Kerala High Court recently upheld the Administrative Tribunal order which stated that Child Care Leave (CCL) facility cannot be said to be restricted to the two 'eldest' surviving children alone, particularly when such facility had not been availed in respect of the first two children.

Interpreting Section 43-C of the Central Civil Service (Leave) Rules 1972, the Division Bench comprising Justice Alexander Thomas and Justice C. Jayachandran said,

"CCL benefit is available for 'two children', no matter whether they are 'eldest' or not. The only stipulation is that the Rule is available 'upto two children'."

'Period Spent By Teacher To Pursue PhD Can Be Counted As Teaching Experience' : Kerala High Court Allows Priya Varghese's Appeal

Case Title: Priya Varghese V Dr. Joseph Skariah

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 284

The Kerala High Court set aside the order of the Single Judge that directed the Kannur University to re-examine the credentials of Priya Varghese to be appointed as Associate Professor at Kannur University. Priya Varghese is the wife of K.K. Ragesh, private secretary to Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan.

In November 2022, a Single Bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran had held that Priya Varghese did not possess the requisite teaching experience, to be appointed as Associate Professor at the Department of Malayalam at Kannur University and directed the competent authority of the University to reconsider her credentials and decide whether she should continue on the Rank List. Dr.Joseph Skariah, who was ranked after Varghese in the Rank List, had filed the writ petition challenging the inclusion of Varghese in the List stating that she was not qualified for the post of Associate Professor as she did not have the prescribed 8 years of teaching experience prescribed.

In an appeal by Priya Varghese, a division bench of Justice A K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C P set aside the order of the single bench and held that the period spent by Priya Varghese on pursuing her Ph.D. degree under the Faculty Development Programme could not be excluded while considering the period of teaching experience. 

[Koodathayi Murder] Kerala High Court Refuses Interference With Order Allowing Examination Of Notary Who Attested Will Forged By Jolly Joseph

Case Title: Jollyamma Joseph @ Jolly V. State Of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 285

The Kerala High Court has dismissed the petition filed by Jolly Joseph, prime accused in the Koodathyi Murder case, challenging an order of the Sessions Court that allowed the notary who had attested the Will forged by her, to be examined as a witness.

Jolly had filed the petition contending that the notary was earlier arrayed as the 5th accused in the case and hence could not be examined as a witness, even though the proceedings against him were later quashed by the High Court.

A Single Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V held that since the notary is no longer an accused, there is no embargo in the prosecution summoning and examining him. The Court relied on the decision of the Apex Court in Varsha Garg v. State of Madhya Pradesh [2022 SCC OnLine SC 986] to observe,

“the scope and ambit of the powers under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. has held that the criminal court has ample power to summon any person as a witness or recall and re-examine any such person, even if the evidence on both sides is closed and the jurisdiction of the court must obviously be dictated by the exigency of the situation. Fair play and good sense appear to be the only safe guides, and only the requirements of justice command the examination of any person, which would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case.”

Excess Payment Negligently Granted Cannot Be Recovered When Employee Has No Knowledge That Payment Is More Than What Is Entitled: Kerala High Court

Case Title: State of Kerala & Ors. v. Seena M.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 286

The Kerala High Court held that excess payment that was carelessly or negligently granted to an employee by an employer cannot be recovered, particularly when the employee had no knowledge that the amount that was paid was more than what (s)he was entitled to.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Alexander Thomas and Justice C. Jayachandran, on considering the case of an applicant teacher who was paid excess increment based on a Government Order, ascertained that the situation was covered within the ambit of clause (v) of the situations summarized in paragraph 18 of State of Punjab & Ors. v. Rafiq Masih (White Washer Case) (2015). The said clause states that recoveries of excess payment by employers, would be impermissible in law where the recovery if made from the employee, would be iniquitous or harsh or arbitrary to such an extent, as would far outweigh the equitable balance of the employer's right to recover.

Use Of AI Cameras For Detecting Road Violations Cannot Be Discouraged Due To Corruption Allegations: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Mohanan V.V State Of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 287

The Kerala High Court held that the ‘innovative venture’ of using AI (Artificial Intelligence) cameras for detecting road violations cannot be discouraged merely because of allegations of corruption in implementation of the project.

A single bench of Justice P V Kunhikrishnan observed there may be objections regarding transparency of the project and even corruption allegations. However, those are to be dealt with separately.

“An innovative system is introduced in the State to detect the violation of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and Rules by installing AI surveillance Cameras on the roads. We have to appreciate the government and its Motor Vehicle department for introducing the same. There is no criticism from any part against the installation of AI Cameras, even from opposition parties in the state. They also wholeheartedly accept the new venture. “

'Privacy Is The Core Of Human Dignity': Kerala High Court Orders Online Images Of Woman Facing Humiliation And Cyber Attacks Be Removed

Case Title: XXX. V State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 288

The Kerala High Court directed the Director General of Police to take steps to remove online images and details of a woman who is a victim of offences under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.

The Petitioner had approached the High Court for removal of online content having her name and images circulating on social media, which had resulted in humiliation and cyber attacks on her.

Taking note of the submission of the Petitioner that circulation of such content on social media is violating her right to privacy, a single bench of Justice K Babu observed that:

“Privacy is the ultimate expression of the sanctity of the individual. There cannot be dignity to an individual without privacy. It is a constitutional value founded on fundamental rights. Privacy with its attended values assures dignity to the individual. Dignity is the core which unites fundamental rights. Privacy is the constitutional core of human dignity.”

'Safe Sex' Education Need Of The Hour: Kerala High Court Suggests Govt To Constitute Committee To Address Issue

Case Title: XXX v Union of India

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 289

Stressing on the need for proper ‘safe sex education’ among the youth, the Kerala High Court on Friday suggested the Government to consider constituting a committee and introducing ‘safe sex education’ in school and college curriculums. The Court asked the Chief Secretary to take appropriate action in this regard.

The Court made this observation while considering a plea by a father to medically terminate the pregnancy of his minor daughter impregnated by his minor son. A single bench of Justice P V Kunhikrishnan observed that such incidents take place due to lack of knowledge about safe sex:

“It is the duty of our society to keep these parents close to get over from this trauma. Nobody can blame the parents. But, we the society is responsible for this. Sibling incest may take place in the context of a family system that does not provide a safe environment for its members. But it may also happen because of the lack of knowledge about safe sex. I am of the considered opinion that the Government should seriously think about the necessity of proper ‘sex education’ in schools and colleges.”

Prosecutrix Was Married Yet Maintained Sexual Relations With Another Married Man: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape FIR

Case Title: Kripesh Krishnan v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 290

The Kerala High Court quashed criminal proceedings against a married man, who was alleged to have committed rape on a married woman.

Justice K. Babu observed that in the present case, the prosecutrix (2nd respondent herein) was a married woman with children, and aware that the petitioner accused was also married. The Court noted that despite the same, she maintained sexual relations with the petitioner on many occasions.

"It is difficult to conclude that the prosecutrix had not given consent for the sexual relationship with the petitioner under any misconception of facts so as to hold that the petitioner is guilty of having committed rape within the meaning of Section 375 of IPC," the Court thus noted.

Kerala High Court Raps Kochi Corporation For Inaction Against Street Food Stalls Dumping Waste Into Stormwater Canals

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

The Kerala High Court recently came down heavily on the Kochi Corporation for not taking stringent action against hotels, particularly “thattukadas” (street side food stalls) for dumping waste into stormwater canals.

The High Court in an order last year had directed the Kochi Corporation to act against citizens, commercial establishments dumping plastic/ garbage in stormwater drains.

A single bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran observed:

“I fail to understand why the Corporation takes the afore stand because, in the order dated 11.11.2022, this Court has injuncted every section, including private citizens, from discharging any waste into the stormwater canals. ‘Thattukadas’ do not stand on a better footing and every obligation cast upon the citizens of this nation is binding upon them also," the Court stated.

Kerala High Court Orders Kollam Police To Probe Alleged Forgery Of NEET Score Card By Candidate

Case Title: Samikhan S. v. Union of India & Ors.

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday directed the District Police Chief, Kollam, to conduct an enquiry in the matter of alleged manipulation in the National Eligibility Cum Entrance Test (NEET) scorecard of a candidate.

Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan declared that if any criminal offence is found in the matter, the Police authorities would be free to register a case and investigate the same in accordance with law, without waiting for any further order from the Court.

Kantara Plagiarism Row: Kerala High Court Stays Magistrate Order Directing Seizure Of Materials Related To "Varaharoopam" Song

Case Title: Vijay Kirgandur V State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court recently stayed the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kozhikode that had directed the investigating officer to seize agreements/contracts related to the allegedly plagiarised song "Varaharoopam" from the Kannada movie “Kantara”.

Further proceedings pursuant to the order of the Magistrate was stayed by a single bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan in a plea filed by Producer of ‘Kantara’ Vijay Kirgandur and Music Director, B L Ajaneesh.

Kerala High Court Asks Man To Approach Child Welfare Committee For Discharge Of Minor Daughter Impregnated By Her Brother

Case Title: XXX v Union of India

The Kerala High Court on Friday said that the father of a minor girl, who gave birth to a child after being impregnated by her brother, is free to submit an application to the Child Welfare Committee for her restoration in accordance with Section 40 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

A single bench of Justice P V Kunhikrishnan directed the Child Welfare Committee to consider the application, if it is filed, within a week after consultation with doctors. The order of the Child Welfare Committee in this regard has been directed to be submitted before the court.

“Regarding the discharge of the petitioner's child, the Police authorities can do the needful in consultation with the medical authorities. The custody of the new born child of the minor girl also will be decided by the 8th respondent (Child Welfare Committee) in accordance to Sec.35 of the Juvenile Justice Act,” said the court.

Kerala High Court Quashes Case Against Rehana Fathima Over Video Showing Her Children Painting On Her Semi-Naked Body

Case Title: XXX v. State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court on Monday quashed the proceedings against controversial activist Rehana Fathima before the lower court in the matter relating to the circulation of a video that showed her children painting on her semi-nude body.

Justice Kauser Edappagath passed the order.

The allegation against Fathima was that she had asked her two minor children, a boy and a girl of the ages 14 and 8 years respectively, to paint on her semi-nude body, the video of which was thereafter circulated. She had contended that the act was meant to impart sex education to her children and rid the stigma about nudity.

In A First, Kerala High Court Undertakes 'Virtual Site Visit' Of Alleged Encroachment In Forest Land

Case Title: One Earth One Life v. Union of India & Ors.

In an unprecedented step, the Kerala High Court took a virtual view of 56.77 hectares of land in Agali Village.

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice S.V. Bhatti and Justice Basant Balaji, in a matter pertaining to encroachment of forest land in Agali Village, had directed the parties to visit the forest site and give a virtual access to the same, after identifying the location.

Go First: Kerala High Court Refuses To Modify Order For Suspension Of Airline's Ticket Booking Portals

Case Title: Yeshwanth Shenoy v. Union of India

The Kerala High Court recently refused to modify its previous order dated May 5, 2023, directing the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) to check the factual aspects averred by a lawyer in a petition seeking suspension of ticket booking portals of GO First Airlines. The Court had further directed the DGCA that if the same were found to be correct, the Airlines would have to be directed to suspend its ticket booking portals and to further stop their agents from taking any flight bookings.

The Court in this case was dealing with the plea moved by a lawyer seeking the suspension of ticket booking portals of Go First Airlines. An interlocutory application was filed by the Airline company to modify the aforementioned previous Order of the Court. The Court on perusing the same found that no such modification was necessary.

"The petitioner is free to approach the 2nd respondent (DGCA) and convince him about their stand, and if such request is received from the petitioner, the 2nd respondent will give an opportunity of hearing to the 1st respondent (Union of India) and pass appropriate orders in it, in accordance with law," Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan observed

On SBI's Appeal, Kerala High Court Stays Single Bench Decision Against Rejection Of Educational Loan Over Student's CIBIL Score

Case Title: State Bank of India & Anr. v. Noel Paul Fredy

The Kerala High Court recently stayed the Single Bench decision which held that an application for education loan by a student could not be rejected on the ground of a low CIBIL (Credit Information Bureau (India) Limited) score.

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice S.V.N. Bhatti and Justice Basant Balaji passed the Order on taking the view that the writ jurisdiction of the Court could not be invoked on matters involving grant of loan.

'Catch Them Young, Watch Them Grow': Kerala HC Legal Services Committee Introduces 'SAMVADA' To Inculcate Civic Sense In School Students

In a bid to inculcate value based, civic sense in school students and mould them into responsible citizens of the Country, the Kerala High Court has developed yet another novel initiative named ‘SAMVADA’, under the aegis of the High Court Legal Services Committee (HLSC).

The Project which was conceived by Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque in his capacity as the Chairman of the High Court Legal Services Committee, and is now flourishing under the guidance of Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, targets school students of Grade VIII-Grade XII in the State, under the State Board, CBSE and ICSE syllabi. ‘Catch them Young and Watch them Grow’ is the motto of the Project.

Tanur Boat Tragedy: Kerala High Court Grants State Time To Explain Measures To Prevent Boat Accidents, Wants Senior Bureaucrat To Assist In Matter

Case Title: Suo Motu v. State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court recently directed the State Government to nominate a senior most bureaucrat to assist the Court in matter of suo motu proceedings initiated in light of the tragic boat accident in Tanur area of Malappuram district, which claimed 22 lives, including 15 children in May, 2023.

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice S.V.N. Bhatti and Justice Basant Balaji passed the Order.

As per media reports, the tourist boat which had allegedly been functioning without the mandatory fitness certificate, had possibly capsized due to overcrowding. It is alleged that the boat which only had around twenty seats, had accommodated persons over and above its capacity.

Waste Disposal Sites Overwhelmed, Printing Agencies To Face Penal Action If Illegal Hoardings Not Removed Within 7 Days Of Notice: Kerala High Court

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

The Kerala High Court directed the authorities designated by it to identify 'holding areas' for disposal of illegal boards, flags, and festoons erected in public places, as it was informed that the waste disposal facilities in the State are already 'overwhelmed'.

Court said after the designated authorities remove illegal hoardings to the holding areas, the printing agencies will be required to remove such hoardings from the holding areas within 7 days of issuance of notice by the Secretary of the Local Self Government Department (LSG).

Justice Devan Ramachandran warned that failure to comply with the above direction will attract penal consequences for printing agencies, in the nature of action for prosecution and recovery of amounts for the destruction of the boards in a scientific manner.

Kerala Student Suicide: Amal Jyothi College Moves High Court Seeking Protection Amidst Protests By Student Political Organizations

Case Title: Amal Jyothi College of Engineering & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Ors.

A plea has been moved in the Kerala High Court seeking police protection for the management personnel, staff, vehicle and students of Amal Jyothi College of Engineering, amidst protests and alleged threats by the members of various student political organizations, following the suicide of a second year BTech student in the ladies hostel of the college on June 2, 2023.

It is the case of the petitioners that following the incident, several persons belonging to student political outfits such as the Students Federation of India (SFI), Kerala Students Union (KSU), Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI), and Democratic Youth Federation of India (DYFI), gathered at the main gate of the campus, shouting slogans in abusive language and blocking the ingress and egress to and from the college. It is averred that such members of student political organizations forcefully entered the campus, and threatened that the staff, students, and any person inside the campus from leaving the premises, and blocked the gates.

Kerala Student Suicide: High Court Grants Police Protection To Management, Staff Of Amal Jyothi College Of Engineering

Case Title: Amal Jyothi College of Engineering & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Ors.

The Kerala High Court directed the police authorities to extend adequate protection to the management personnel, staff, and others of Amal Jyothi College of Engineering for the smooth functioning of the College for a period of one month.

Justice N. Nagaresh while granting interim protection, observed, "Since it is admission time, if ingress and egress to the college is obstructed, it will affect the functioning of the College".

'Money Can Never Compensate Life': Kerala High Court Closes Plea For Compensation To Deceased Kollam Doctor's Kin As Govt Announces Ex-Gratia

Case Title: Adv. Manoj Rajagopal v. State of Kerala & Ors

The Kerala High Court closed the petition filed by a lawyer seeking Rs. 1 Crore compensation for the bereaved family members of the 23 years old house surgeon, Dr. Vandana Das, who was brutally killed by an injured man brought to the government hospital in police custody.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice Kauser Edappagath took note of the Government Order sanctioning Rs. 25 Lakhs to the parents of the deceased as ex gratia payment.

The bench also expressed doubts regarding the locus standi of the petitioner but declared that it would not be addressing the issue in light of the GO dated June 2.

"The adequacy of the amounts ordered by the Govt is not something that is within the purview of our competence to adjudicate, and in any event, these are issues that are fully within the province of the Govt," the Court observed.

YouTube Video Against Judges : Kerala High Court Asks Contemnor To Express Apology Through YouTube

Case Title: Suo Motu v. K.M. Shajahan

The Kerala High Court asked K.M. Shajahan, the then private secretary of the former Chief Minister of Kerala V.S. Achuthanandan, to tender an unconditional apology, expressing regret for having streamed the objectionable video levelling serious allegations against Judges of the Court after admitting that he has committed contempt of court, and to also, stream a video in his YouTube channel expressing his regret for the same.

The Court refused to accept Shajahan's affidavit, on finding it not to be an 'unconditional apology' in terms of Rule 14(a) of the Contempt of Courts (High Court of Kerala) Rules.

Shajahan had levelled serious allegations against the Judges of the High Court in his speech which is available in the YouTube video channel 'Prathipaksham'. The speech pertained to an Advocate taking money from clients under the pretext of bribing judges. The Court had initiated suo motu contempt proceedings in the matter on finding Shajahan's allegation that some Judges of the High Court are also involved in the aforementioned incident to be contemptuous and scandalizing the judiciary.

Unauthorized Waste Dumping: Kerala High Court Asks Municipal Corporations To Provide Complaint Number To Citizens

Case Title: Suo Motu V State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court asked the Municipal Corporations in the State to put a system in place where residents are provided with a contact number which can be used to alert authorities of unauthorised littering in their area, so that immediate action can be taken.

A Division Bench comprising Justice S.V. Bhatti and Justice Basant Balaji stated that the Chief Secretary must ensure that this target is achieved and in case of any default he would not be “morally eligible” to receive salary. The Court was hearing the suo moto proceedings initiated to monitor solid waste management in the State, in wake of the fire that broke out in Brahmapuram in March 2023.

'Final Hearing Might Take Days' : Kerala High Court Says Judge's Productivity Can't Be Measured Based On Number Of Cases Listed Daily

Case Title: Yeshwanth Shenoy V The Chief Justice High Court of Kerala & Others

The Kerala High Court dismissed the petition filed by Adv. Yeshwanth Shenoy alleging that a sitting judge has limited the number of cases listed before the bench to only 20 matters a day, terming it a 'Publicity Interested litigation' to malign judges and the judiciary.

The lawyer had moved the Court alleging that Justice Mary Joseph was limiting the list of cases before her Court. The Chief Justice, being the Master of Roster, Justice Joseph had no power to direct the Registry to curtail the list, the Petitioner contended.

A Single bench of Justice P V Kunhikrishnan observed that the Court of Justice Mary Joseph being a hearing court cannot be compared to that of an admission court:

“A hearing matter cannot be disposed of like an admission matter. The admission court and the hearing court are entirely different. Sometimes, a hearing of an appeal will take a full day or days. That does not mean that the Judge is not doing his duty. “

Kerala High Court Constitutes Grievance Redressal Committee For Advocates

The Kerala High Court has constituted a Grievance Redressal Committee headed by Chief Justice S V Bhatti for addressing the grievances of Advocates.

The Committee also consists of Justice Muhamed Mustaque, Justice Somarajan P, the Advocate General of Kerala, the Chairman of the Bar Council of Kerala and the President of the High Court Bar Association.

The Committee has been constituted to redress grievances of members of the bar in an attempt to avoid instances of strikes, boycotts by members of the bar.

Fake Experience Certificate Case: Accused Vidya Moves Kerala High Court For Anticipatory Bail

Case Title: Vidya K. Maniyanodi v. State of Kerala

An anticipatory bail plea has been moved in the Kerala High Court by Vidya K., who has been accused of having submitted a forged experience certificate in the interview held to the post of Guest Lecturer (Malayalam) at the Attappadi Rajiv Gandhi Memorial Arts College, Palakkad.

The accused is alleged to have produced forged experience certificate in the name of Maharaja’s College, Ernakulam. As per media reports, the accused, who has been alleged to have committed offences under Sections 465 (Punishment for Forgery), 468 (Forgery for the purposes of cheating), and 471 (Punishment for using forged document as genuine) IPC, is currently in hiding.

The plea avers that both the offences under Sections 465 as well as 471 are bailable. "The other section of offence namely 468 IPC is not attracted in the instant case for the reason that in order to attract the said provision cheating must ensue pursuant to the forgery committed which is absent in the instant case," the petitioner adds.

Kerala High Court Directs Travancore Devaswom Board To Take Immediate Steps To Improve Health Conditions Of Temple Cows

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

The Kerala High Court on Thursday directed the Travancore Devaswom Board to take immediate measures to improve the heath conditions of the cows and bulls in the 'goshala' of Vaikom Sree Mahadeva temple.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice P.G. Ajithkumar issued the directive while considering the suo motu proceedings initiated on the basis of a news report highlighting the lack of proper care for cows in the Goshala of the temple.

Kerala Court Prevents 'Marunadan Malayali' From Publishing Defamatory Content Against Actor Prithviraj

Case Title: Prithviraj Sukumaran V. Marunadan Malayali & Others

The Additional Sub Judge, Ernakulam on Monday passed an injunction against the Malayalam news portal ‘Marunadan Malayali’ preventing the channel from publishing any defamatory content against popular Malayalam Film industry actor Prithviraj Sukumaran.

The interim injunction was passed in a civil defamation suit filed by the actor claiming damages of Rs. 10 Crore. The suit was filed subsequent to certain articles and videos published by Marunadan Malayali in the month of May alleging that the actor had paid a fine of Rs. 25 Crores due to proceedings initiated by the Enforcement Directorate and the Income Tax Department. The news channel also claimed that the actor is making propaganda films funded by a ‘Qatar based mafia’ pumping in black money into the Malayalam film industry. Managing Chief Editor of the Channel, Shajan Skariah is also a party to the suit.

Kerala High Court Dismisses PIL Seeking Enactment Of Law Against Superstition & Human Sacrifice For 'Default'

Case Title: Kerala Yukthi Vadhi Sangham v. Union of India & Ors.

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday dismissed the PIL seeking a direction to be issued to the state government to consider and take a decision regarding enactment and implementation of 'The Kerala Prevention of Eradication of Inhuman Evil Practices, Sorcery and Black Magic Bill, 2019'.

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice S.V.N. Bhatti and Justice Basant Balaji dismissed the petition for default as no counsel for the petitioner, Kerala Yukthi Vadhi Sangham, had appeared before the Court.

"No representation for petitioner...in the forenoon and afternoon. Hence we are constrained to dismiss the writ petition for default," the Court ordered.

Kerala Court Issues Summons To Lakeshore Hospital, Its Doctors For Allegedly Transplanting Liver Of Brain Dead Patient In Violation Of Law

Case Title: Dr. S. Ganapathy v. Lakeshore Hospital & Ors.

A Kerala Court recently issued summons to Lakeshore Hospital and some of its doctors, who were alleged to have transplanted the liver of an 18-year-old accident victim to a Malaysian national, in violation of the Transplantation of Human Organs Act (THOA), 1994. The victim's kidneys and liver were harvested in violation of the law, according to a private complaint before the court.

The Judicial First Class Magistrate VIII Eldos Mathew said there is a prima facie case and sufficient grounds for proceeding in respect of offences under Sections 18 (Punishment for removal of human organ without authority), 20 (Punishment for contravention of any other provision of the Act), and 21 (Offences by companies) of THOA.

Kerala High Court Restores Appeal Before EPF Appellate Tribunal, Asks Petitioner To Plant 10 Trees As Cost

Case Title: Dr. Aravindan V. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner

The Kerala High Court recently restored an appeal before the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal on the condition that the petitioner will plant ten trees in the coming monsoon as costs towards restoration.

A single bench of Justice Amit Rawal passed the order while considering a plea filed by the proprietor of Aravind Medical Centre, a private hospital in Kollam, challenging the order of the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, which had dismissed the petitioner’s appeal for default.

Kattakkada Christian College Elections Row: Kerala High Court Stays Arrest Of SFI Leader In Impersonation Case

Case Title: Visakh A. v. State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday stayed the arrest of a Student Federation of India (SFI) leader Visakh A in the case related to the elections conducted at Christian College, Kattakkada, until June 20.

The case pertains to the alleged impersonation, falsification of documents and misrepresentation during the college elections held in May 2023.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, while considering the anticipatory bail application by the accused petitioner, said the allegations in the case are serious and directed the Prosecutor to produce the case diary.

K. Sudhakaran Moves Kerala High Court Seeking Anticipatory Bail For Alleged Involvement In Monson Mavunkal Cheating Case

Case Title: K. Sudhakaran v. State of Kerala & Anr.

An anticipatory bail plea has been moved in the Kerala High Court by the Member of Parliament and President of Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee, K. Sudhakaran, in respect of his alleged involvement in the cheating case involving the controversial antique dealer Monson Mavunkal.

The cheating case against Mavunkal was registered on September 23, 2021, on the complaint of certain persons alleging cheating of Rs. 10 Crores on the false promise to return the amount. It was also alleged that the accused had deceived the complainants by showing them false statements on his account.

ED Moves Kerala High Court For Cancellation Of Bail Granted To Santhosh Eapen By Sessions Court In LIFE Mission Case

Case Title: The Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement V. Santhosh Eappen

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has approached the Kerala High Court for cancellation of bail granted by the Sessions Court to Santhosh Eapen, Managing Director of Unitac Builders and an accused in the LIFE mission corruption case.

The Special Court for PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering) Cases had granted bail to Eapen in March in a crime registered by the ED. The allegation against Eapen is that as head of M/s Unitac builders and M/s Sane Ventures, a huge amount of money collected for construction of residential apartments for flood affected people in Wadakkanchery was illegally siphoned off by him as upfront commission for execution of the LIFE (Livelihood Inclusion Financial Empowerment) Mission project.

Kerala High Court Finds Prima Facie Contempt On Part Of Police Officer For Arresting Person In Violation Of Arnesh Kumar Guidelines

Case Title: Vinod Mohan v. Belraj

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday took the prima facie view that a police officer had committed contempt of court in arresting a person in violation of the guidelines laid down by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar & Anr. [AIR 2014 SC 2756].

The Division Bench comprising Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Sophy Thomas thereby directed the respondent police officer to appear before it on the next date of posting.

Kerala High Court Stays Proceedings Against Actor Unni Mukundan In Sexual Harassment Case Based On Amicable Settlement Claim

Case Title: Unni Mukundan V State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court on Thursday stayed the trial proceedings against Malayalam film actor Unni Mukundan in a case where he is facing prosecution for offences under Sections 354 (Assault of criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty) and Section 354-B (Assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to disrobe) of the Indian Penal Code,1860.

The case relates to an ongoing trial against the actor, initiated based on a complaint filed by a woman in 2017, accusing the actor of sexual harassment. The complainant alleged that the actor forcefully kissed her and attempted to rape her when she visited him at his residence in Kochi to discuss a movie project.

A Single Bench of Justice K Babu passed the order in light of the submission that the matter had been amicably settled between the parties and it was futile to proceed with the case further.

Kerala High Court Directs Crime Branch To Not Take Coercive Steps Against K. Sudhakaran In Monson Mavunkal Cheating Case Till June 21

Case Title: K. Sudhakaran v. State of Kerala & Anr.

The Kerala High Court on Friday directed the Crime Branch to not take any coercive steps against MP and KPCC President, K. Sudhakaran, in respect of his alleged involvement in the cheating case involving the controversial antique dealer Monson Mavunkal, until the next posting date, 21st June.

A single bench of Justice Ziyad Rahman passed the order while considering an anticipatory bail plea moved by Sudhakaran. The Court noted the submission of the DGP that the date fixed for appearance of the petitioner before the investigating officer is 23rd June. The DGP also sought time to get instructions.

“In the light of the submission made by the Learned DGP, this Court expects that no coercive steps shall be initiated against the petitioner till the next posting date” the Court stated.

Kerala High Court Directs State To Report Impact On Health Of Residents Near Brahmapuram Waste Management Site

Case Title: Mapranam Nilampathinjamugal Residents Association V State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court recently directed the Additional Chief Secretary and the Ernakulam District Collector to carry out a socio-economic study in the Brahmapuram area and to submit a report on the impact of the unauthorised handling of solid waste at Brahmapuram on the health of the inhabitants in the area.

A division bench of Chief Justice S V N Bhatti and Justice Basant Balaji was considering a plea filed by various residents’ associations around Brahmapuram area seeking directions from the Court to prevent waste from flowing into the water bodies with the start of monsoon season by June 2023.

“Socio-economic impact study of Bramhapuram is undertaken, and a report is filed on the impact on the population from the unauthorised handling of the municipal solid waste site in Bramhapuram. The report gives the impact on the health of the inhabitants, referring to the first circle – 500-metre radius, second circle – 2-kilometre radius, and third circle – 5-kilometre radius of human habitation. The study can be on random samples to be decided by the District Administration,” the Court stated in its order.

Kerala High Court Directs Bar Council Of Kerala To Collect Only Rs 750 As Enrollment Fee Until Uniform Fee Structure Is Fixed By BCI

Case Title: Bar Council of Kerala V. Akshai M Sivan

The Kerala High Court on Monday directed the Bar Council of Kerala to collect only Rs.750/- as enrolment fee from law graduates wishing to enroll, while the Bar Council of India considers a uniform fee structure as directed by the Supreme Court.

The order was passed by a division bench of Chief Justice S V N Bhatti and Justice Basant Balaji in an appeal filed by the Bar Council of Kerala against the order of single judge restricting the enrollment fee to Rs. 750/-.

'Keep Customers In Mind': Kerala High Court Suggests Federal Bank And Officers’ Association To Consider Mediation To Resolve Dispute

Case Title: Federal Bank Officers Association, Vs The Regional Labour Commissioner (Central)

The Kerala High Court on Friday suggested to the Federal Bank and the Federal Bank Officers’ Association to consider mediation to resolve the dispute between the parties keeping in mind the larger public interest.

A single bench of Justice C S Dias asked both parties to keep in mind the customers’ plight “I’m saying this in the larger public interest. What is the customer’s due? You can strike, you can have collective bargaining whatever you want, that is not the concern. What about the customers? Tomorrow banks will come to a stand still, what will the people do?” the Court asked both parties.

Justice Dias told the counsel for Federal Bank to listen to the demands of the Officers’ Association “They have certain demands, you sit across the table and decide. If you are both ready I will refer you to a retired Supreme Court judge or retired High Court judge, you sit across the table and have a mediation.”

Kerala Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail To 'Marunadan Malayali' Editor Shajan Skaria In Case By MLA Under SC/ST Act

Case Title: Shajan Skaria v. SHO, Elamakkara Police Station & Anr.

A Kerala Court on Friday dismissed the anticipatory bail plea of Shajan Skariah, editor and publisher of YouTube Channel Marunadan Malayali, in the case against him for allegedly broadcasting a derogatory news item against MLA Sreenijin.

The Special Court Judge for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Honey M. Varghese found the allegations levelled by the petitioner, Skariah, against MLA Sreenijin, who is the de-facto complainant, to be insulting and defamatory. The Court found that the petitioner had knowledge that the de-facto complainant belongs to scheduled caste community, and that the publication of the news item containing derogatory comments through his YouTube channel was sufficient to attract the offence alleged under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

"In this matter, the de facto complainant is a Member of the Legislative Assembly elected from a constituency reserved for scheduled caste and the accused has clear knowledge about him. The news item clearly mentions that the de facto complainant is a Member of Legislative Assembly. The knowledge of the accused that the de facto complainant belongs to Scheduled Caste could be discernible from the prosecution records and other materials", the Court observed while rejecting his plea.

Kerala Court Sentences Fake Antique Dealer Monson Mavunkal To Life Imprisonment For Raping Minor

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

A Kerala Court on Saturday sentenced the fake antique dealer Monson Mavunkal to life imprisonment for sexual abuse of a minor girl and imposed a fine of Rs 5,25,000 on him.

Additional District and Sessions Judge K. Soman said Mavunkal, who was found to have committed repeated rape on a minor girl, exploiting the financial position of her family and aborting her pregnancy at his residence, does not deserve any leniency and has to be dealt with adequate sentence.

Bar Council Members Dictating Syllabus For Law Courses Biggest Tragedy, They Don’t Know What Is Happening Beyond Litigation: Justice Muhamed Mustaque

Speaking at the launch of a mentoring initiative ‘Juris Trailblazers’, Justice Muhamed Mustaque of the Kerala High Court on Sunday said it is the "biggest tragedy" that law colleges are "dictating" syllabus for the law colleges.

“Who is dictating our syllabus? The bar council members. This is the biggest tragedy we are facing in India. The miniscule people who get elected through an election, decide about legal education. They are only litigation professionals, their domain knowledge is only concerned with litigation and they dictate the syllabus. This is the biggest challenge we face in India. They don’t have an idea of what is happening beyond litigation. No College has autonomy to decide on their curriculum. If they don’t follow the curriculum dictated by the Bar Council, necessarily they will face some penal action and their course will not be recognised.” Justice Mustaque said.

Plea In Kerala High Court Alleges RSS Members Illegally Using Temple Premises To Impart Weapon Training

Case Title: G. Vyasan & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Ors.

A plea has been moved in the Kerala High Court alleging illegal encroachment of Sree Sarkara Devi Temple in Thiruvananthapuram by alleged members of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) for conducting mass drills and weaponry training.

The plea filed by two devotees and nearby residents of the temple avers that such action of the alleged RSS members is causing much agony and difficulty to the devotees and pilgrims visiting the temple, particularly, the women and children.

Congress Leaders Approach Kerala High Court Seeking Probe Into Safe Kerala Project; Allege Corruption, Privacy Violation Through AI Cameras

Case Title: V.D. Satheeshan & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Leader of the Opposition of the Kerala Legislative Assembly and MLA V.D Satheeshan and MLA Ramesh Chennithala have approached the Kerala High Court seeking a Court monitored enquiry into the project for Automated Traffic Enforcement System for Safe Kerala.

Automated Traffic Enforcement System for Safe Kerala Project was envisioned by the Transport Department to install AI cameras across the State for capturing traffic violations and issuing notice to the violators.

The plea was filed challenging the orders issued by the Government, action taken by the delegate KELTRON which is a State Government Company, and the alleged illegalities and corruption attached to the installation of AI Cameras that have resulted in nepotism, favouritism and corruption including violation of privacy of persons.

Life Mission Case: Sivasankar Approaches Kerala High Court Again Seeking Interim Bail To Avail Treatment At Private Hospital

Case Title: M. Sivasankar v. Directorate of Enforcement & Anr.

The former Principal Secretary to the Chief Minister of Kerala, M. Sivasankar, once again approached the Kerala High Court seeking interim bail for a period of 3 months, on grounds of ill-health and to avail treatment at a private hospital of his choice. The plea has been moved after Special Court declined him bail.

Sivasankar is in custody in connection with the Life Mission money laundering case, since his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate on February 14. On February 24, 2023, Sivasankar was remanded to judicial custody until March 8, 2023. Subsequently, the remand was extended and Sivasankar has been continuing under judicial custody.

AI Camera Installation : Kerala High Court To Examine Impact On Exchequer Due To Change Of BOOT Model; Restrains Govt From Making Financial Payments

Case Title: V.D. Satheeshan & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Ors.

The Kerala High Court directed the State Government not to make any financial payments to the contractors connected with the installation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) cameras for road traffic regulation, until further orders. The Court also sought the response of the State Government, state undertaking KELTRON and the private players associated with the project.

The Court was considering a plea filed by Leader of the Opposition of the Kerala Legislative Assembly and MLA V.D. Satheeshan and MLA Ramesh Chennithala seeking a Court monitored enquiry into the "Automated Traffic Enforcement System for Safe Kerala Project", which was envisioned by the Transport Department to install AI cameras across the State for capturing traffic violations. The petitioners have alleged corruption illegalities and corruption in the installation of AI Cameras that have "resulted in nepotism, favouritism and corruption including violation of privacy of persons".

Kerala High Court Grants Interim Pre-Arrest Bail To Congress MP K Sudhakaran In Cheating Case, Asks Him To Appear Before IO

Case Title: K. Sudhakaran v. State of Kerala & Anr.

The Kerala High Court granted interim anticipatory bail to MP and President of Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee (KPCC), K. Sudhakaran, in the cheating case involving the controversial antique dealer Monson Mavunkal.

The Single Judge Bench of Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. further directed the Congress leader to appear before the Investigation Officer in compliance with the 41A notice issued to him.

"After considering the arguments placed by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, and the DGP, I am inclined to grant an interim order, particularly taking note of the fact that the petitioner has been issued with a notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C. directing him to appear before the Investigating Officer on June 23, 2023. Accordingly it is directed that petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer in compliance with the notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C., and in the event of arrest, he shall be released on bail on execution of a bond for Rs. 50,000/- with two solvent sureties..," it was observed.

Litigant Vandalizes Car Of Family Court Judge In Kerala

The car of the Thiruvalla Family Court Judge was vandalized by a 53 year old man today in court premises.

The accused, EP Jayaprakash, who has divorce, maintenance, and return of dowry cases that are currently pending, had reportedly become agitated during his examination by the Judge, and created a ruckus in Court. Thereafter, he allegedly bought an earthenware from a shop, and smashed the windows of the Family Court Judge GR Bilkul's car, and vandalized the same.

Jayaprakash was subsequently taken into custody by Inspector BK Sunilkrishnan, and is currently being interrogated.

Ernakulam Consumer Forum Directs Printing Press To Compensate Author For Failure To Print Book In Time

Case Title: Thomas George v. Peter Job

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Ernakulam recently directed a printing press to compensate the author of a book for its failure to print the author's book in time.

The Bench comprising President D.B. Binu and Members V. Ramachandran and Sreevidhia T.N. awarded a sum of Rs. 31,460 as compensation to the author.

As per the facts of the case, Theressa Offset Printers & New Indian Press had submitted a quotation offering the complainant to print 500 copies of his book, 'History & Science of Numbers', the English version of 'Akkangalude Charithram', for Rs. 31,690. The complainant accepted the offer for printed books in 'word format', to be delivered by the end of July 2016.

Kerala High Court Quashes PMLA Proceedings Against Ex-MLA KM Shaji In Plus Two Bribery Case

Case Title: K.M. Shaji Vs Union Of India

The Kerala High Court quashed the proceedings initiated by the Enforcement Directorate against Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) leader and former MLA K M Shaji under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) in connection with the plus two bribery case.

A single bench of Justice P V Kunhikrishnan passed the order quashing the proceedings. In April 2023, another single bench had quashed the FIR registered against Shaji by the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau stating that there was no allegation of any demand made by the Petitioner.

The Court passed the order quashing the PMLA proceedings finding force in the submission of the Counsel for the Petitioner that according to the decision of the Apex Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Others V. Union of India, if criminal proceedings are quashed the proceedings under the PMLA will not stand.-

Kerala High Court Issues Notice To RSS Members Allegedly Imparting Weapon Training At Temple; Seeks Response From State, Devaswom Board

Case Title: G. Vyasan & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Ors.

The Kerala High Court issued notice to alleged RSS members said to be illegally encroaching premises of Sree Sarkara Devi Temple in Thiruvananthapuram for conducting mass drills and weaponry training.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice P.G. Ajithkumar also sought response of the State government and the Travancore Devaswom Board, and posted the matter for further consideration on 26th June.

The plea has been filed by two devotees and nearby residents of the temple stating that the action of the alleged RSS members is causing agony and difficulty to the devotees and pilgrims visiting the temple, particularly, the women and children.

Kerala High Court Refers Federal Bank And Officers’ Association To Mediation In View Of Larger Public Interest

Case Title: Federal Bank Officers Association Vs Regional Labour Commissioner (Central)

The Kerala High Court referred Federal Bank and Federal Bank Officers’ Association to mediation for resolution of their dispute. The Court constituted a mediation tribunal consisting of Justice A.M.Shaffique (former Judge of Kerala High Court), Adv Sreelal N Warrier and Adv George Merlo Pallath trained Mediators of the Kerala State Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court of Kerala.

A single bench of Justice C S Dias stated that

“Taking into account the goodwill and reputation that the second respondent – Bank has earned over the last several decades, and also the larger public interest that is involved, particularly the interest, anxiety and fear of the customers of the second respondent, I am of the view that interest of the 1.40 crore customers of the Bank would over-ride and outweigh the petitioner's demands and the second respondent's alleged obstinacy.”

Kerala High Court Raps Media; Says Litigant's Dignity & Privacy Can't Be Harmed; Calls For 'Responsible Journalistic Conduct' In Court Coverage

Case Title: Priya Varghese V Dr. Joseph Skariah

While allowing Priya Varghese's appeal, the Kerala High Court made some critical observations against the media coverage of the case. Priya Varghese is the wife of K.K. Ragesh, private secretary to Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan.

Taking note of the media attention received by the case, a division bench of Justice A K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C P reminded the press to respect the right to privacy of the litigant and to follow responsible journalistic conduct. The Court stated that the an individual's Right to Privacy is not only against the State but also against private parties such as the media.

“On account of its nature as a right that is personal to an individual, we are of the view that the newly recognised fundamental right to privacy, which takes within its fold the right to protection of one’s reputation as well, would merit classification as a fundamental right that protects an individual, not only against arbitrary State action, but also against the actions of other private citizens, such as the press or media. We trust, therefore, that the media will take note of these observations and adopt a code of responsible journalistic conduct that will inform news reporting in the days to come.” the Court stated.

Firm Says It Couldn't File Online Forms Due To Errors In MCA Website; Kerala High Court Grants Interim Relief From Late Fee

Case Title: M/S Safa Jewels Areacode LLP v. Union of India & Ors.

The Kerala High Court directed the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) to accept Forms 3 and 4 filed by M/S Safa Jewels Areacode LLP, without insisting on the additional fee of Rs.37,500/-, for the delay in filing the same.

Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan passed the interim order in a plea filed by Safa Jewels LLP. The plea averred that the latter was unable to file the said forms due to the errors on the website of the MCA, which had not been resolved despite the petitioner submitting several complaints regarding the same.

CRPF Personnel Moves Kerala High Court Against 'Time Barred' E-Challans For Overspeeding

Case Title: Anil Kumar R. v. Regional Transport Officer (Enforcement) & Ors.

A plea has been filed before the Kerala High Court by a CRPF personnel against speeding challans issued to him allegedly beyond the statutory time limit.

The Single Judge Bench of Justice C.S. Dias on Friday admitted the matter and directed the Government Pleader to get instructions.

The petitioner in this case was issued two e-challans on March 5, 2023, for violation of permissible speed limit by his motor vehicle on two instances on September 28, 2022, identified by an AI Camera. Upon verification, it was discovered that it was the petitioner's son who had driven the vehicle on the said date.

Asianet Journalist Moves Kerala High Court Against FIR For Alleged Conspiracy To Defame SFI Leader

Case Title: Akhila Nandakumar v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Chief Reporter of Asianet News Channel Akhila Nandakumar has moved the Kerala High Court for quashing the FIR registered against her for allegedly conspiring to defame CPI(M)'s student wing leader PM Arsho in connection with the Maharaja’s College examination controversy.

Single Judge Bench of Justice K. Babu was informed by the Prosecution that no coercive steps shall be taken against Nandakumar in the matter until the next date of posting.

PM Arsho is a postgraduate Archaeology student at Maharajas College and the State General Secretary of Students Federation of India. He alleged that even though he did not appear for the 3rd semester exam, the college authorities wrongly passed him and the journalist, allegedly acting in conspiracy with the college principal and department co-ordinator, spread this news to defame him.

Kerala High Court Restores PIL Seeking Enactment Of Law Against Superstition & Human Sacrifice

Case Title: Kerala Yukthi Vadhi Sangham v. Union of India & Ors.

The Kerala High Court restored the PIL seeking a direction to be issued to the State government to consider and take a decision regarding enactment and implementation of 'The Kerala Prevention of Eradication of Inhuman Evil Practices, Sorcery and Black Magic Bill, 2019'.

The Court had earlier dismissed the petition for default as no counsel for the petitioner, Kerala Yukthi Vadhi Sangham, had appeared before the Court.

Advocate P.V. Jeevesh appearing for the petitioner before the Division Bench comprising Chief Justice S.V.N. Bhatti and Justice Basant Balaji explained the reason for not having been able to appear on the two previous instances, pursuant to which the petition was restored by the Court.

Kerala High Court Grants Interim Anticipatory Bail To KSU Leader Ansil Jaleel In Case Alleging Forgery Of Degree Certificate

Case Title: Ansil v. State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court has granted interim anticipatory bail to Kerala Students Union (KSU) State Convenor Ansil Jaleel, in the case against him alleging forgery of degree certificate.

The Single Judge Bench of Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. directed Jaleel to appear before the Investigation Officer within a week. The Court stated that Jaleel shall be released on bail on execution of a bond for Rs. 50,000/-, in the event of his arrest.

The case surfaced when a Malayalam newspaper published an article alleging Jaleel to have forged a degree certificate from Kerala University to secure employment at Muthoot Finance, a private financial institution.

'Foreign Object' Left Inside Patient In Surgery: Kerala High Court Directs Police To Forward Complaint To Medical Negligence Panel

Case Title: Annamma Sebastian V. State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court directed the Station House Officer of Edathala gram panchayat to forward to Expert Panel for Medical Negligence, the complaint filed by a patient’s wife regarding a foreign object allegedly being left inside her husband’s body after being operated on for removal of his kidney at Rajagiri Hospital.

A Single Bench of Justice Kauser Edappagath directed,

“The 2nd respondent [Station House Officer] shall forward Ext.P1 complaint to the 3rd respondent [Expert Panel (Medical Negligence)] for his opinion, if not already forwarded.”

The Petitioner’s husband had undergone a surgery at Rajagiri Hospital, wherein one of his kidneys was removed as it was affected with cancer. After the surgery his health started deteriorating and he got admitted at Believer’s Church Medical College Hospital Thiruvalla. A CT Scan at Believer’s Hospital revealed that a foreign body was left inside the body of the patient during the surgery at Rajagiri Hospital which was causing infection of his internal organs. Thereafter, the patient was shifted to Rajagiri Hospital. However, it is alleged that the hospital did not take any steps to remove the foreign body from the patient’s body and he was eventually discharged.

Illness No Ground To Seek Exemption From Wearing Helmet While Riding Two Wheelers : Kerala High Court

Case Title: Mohanan V.V State Of Kerala

The Kerala High Court has held that illness is no ground to seek exemption from wearing helmets while reading two wheelers.

Petitioners contended that as they were undergoing medical treatment, they could not place heavy objects on their heads including helmets. The Petitioners had approached the Court in light of the recent installation of AI surveillance cameras on the roads in the State. The Court however, refused to entertain the prayer of the petitioners and held that no one can be exempted from wearing a helmet while riding a two wheeler.

The bench of Justice PV Kunhikrishnan held :

“I am of the considered opinion that, there cannot be any exemption to a citizen from wearing helmet while driving or riding a two wheeler. If the petitioners are suffering from any illness which disable them from wearing helmets, they have to abandon their two wheeler ride. They cannot avoid helmet in such situation while driving or riding. Wearing of helmet while riding a two wheeler is to protect the life of the citizen.”