Kerala High Court Monthly Digest: June 2024 [Citations: 325-396]

C. Girishdas v Government of Kerala and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 325

Y. Sleebachan v State of Kerala and Another 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 326

Geetha v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 327

M/S. Krishna Holiday Village v The Deputy Commissioner, 2024 LiveLaw Ker 328

Prabhakaran P. V State Of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw Ker 329

Suo Moto v Yeshwanth Shenoy, 2024 LiveLaw Ker 330

Jewel Roshan T v Union of India,2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 331

Vignesh Kumar Balasundar v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw Ker 332

Chandanapurath Rajeevan and Another v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 333

Sunil N S v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 334

Sijo Thomas v State of Kerala and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 335

M/S.I.T.I.LTD Versus State Of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 336

Chairman, PSM College of Dental Sciences & Research v Reshma Vinod and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 337

Shafeek v State of Kerala & Connected Cases, 2024 LiveLaw Ker 338

A J Stephen v Rosemariya, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 339

S. Kamaladharan v Kerala Shipping and Inland Corporation Ltd. And Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 340

M/S M.Trade Links Versus Union Of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 341

Bindulal V. S. & Others v State of Kerala and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 342

xxx v Director General of Police , 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 343

The Assistant Commissioner v Anis Mohammed Hussain, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 344

Althaf J. Muhammed v The District Police Chief and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 345

Sathyabhama v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 346

Limjith K J v Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 347

xxx v Superintendent of Police, CBI, 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 348

Jomon Sebastian & Ors vs. Assistant Labour Officer & Ors, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 349

Snigdha Sreenath (Minor) v Travancore Devaswom Board, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 350

Aswathy K. P. @ Aswathy v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 351

Athul v State of Kerala & Connected Cases, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 352

N. Ansari v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw Ker 353

K K Joshwa v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 354

Elsy Abraham v State of Kerala and Others, 2024 LiveLaw Ker 355

Travancore Rural Development Producer Company Ltd. Vs Divya Lakshmi Sanal And Ors, 2024 Live Law Ker 356

XXX v Union Of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 357

Darvin Dominic v State Of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 358

Shilpa v K K Rajeevan, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 359

Joji Joseph v State of Kerala & Connected Matters, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 360

Raju K. J. v Deepak T. V. and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker)361

Sipahi Kumar v State of Kerala, Jaymangal Shah v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw Ker 362

Lakeshore Hospital And Research Centre Limited Versus The Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax/ Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 363

Balan Panicker Ramesh Kumar Versus Union Of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 364

Jitha Sanjay v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 365

Equity Intelligence India Pvt. Ltd Versus PCIT, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 366

Jitha Sanjay and Others v State of Kerala and Other, 2024 LiveLaw(Ker) 367

Usha Bagri Versus The Assistant Commissioner, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 368

M/S. Sunny Jacob Jewellers Gold Hyper Market Versus CIT, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 369

Sujith T. V. v Fertilisers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd. And Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 370

Muhammed Sahir v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 371

Ayana Charitable Trust (formerly known as Gospel for Asia) v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 372

State of Kerala v Muraleedharan K. V., 2024 LiveLaw(Ker) 373

M/S. DLF Home Developers Limited Versus State Of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 374

Kakkoth Radha and Others v Bathakkathalakkal Batlak Musthafa and Another, 2024 LiveLaw(Ker) 375

Sebin Thomas v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 376

Ivin v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 377

Amal v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 378

Kishore Kumar J V Additional Chief Secretary & Connected Matter, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 379

Sakeer v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 380

The Federal Bank Ltd. V Federal Bank Officer's Association, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 381

Sharafudheen v State of Kerala & Connected Cases, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 382

S v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 383

Smitha v Anil Kumar, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 384

P. Ummer Koya v State of Kerala and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 385

Ashraf @ Asharaf Moulavi v Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 386

State of Kerala v Ajayakumar V., 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 387

Jayasree v Indrapalan and Another, 2024 LiveLaw(Ker) 388

Rajesh K. The District Geologist and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 389

:JTPAC v Maradu Municipality, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 390

Reghunadan v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 391

Murali @Muralidharan V State Of Kerala , 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 392

P.B.Sourbhan v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 393

Hena Khatoon and Another v State of Kerala and Another, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 394

Shalet v State of Kerala , 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 395

Hillwood Furniture Pvt. Ltd Versus The Assistant Commissioner, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 396

Judgment/Orders This Month

PIL In Kerala High Court Seeks To Ban Transporation & Cultivation Of Arali Plant In State After Death Of Nurse

Case Title: C. Girishdas v Government of Kerala and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw Ker 325

A public interest litigation was filed before the Kerala High Court to ban the use, transportation and cultivation of the Oleander plant (Arali) from the State. The petition was filed after the death of a nurse who died from a heart attack on April 28 allegedly caused by consuming Arali leaves. This matter has led to a discussion on whether Arali is safe to be used in pujas.

Surya Surendran was going to the UK to start her new job. She vomited and collapsed at the Cochin International Airport. Later while undergoing treatment, she died in a private hospital. The post-mortem report showed the presence of some toxic substances in her blood. Before the journey, she had chewed a leaf from an Arali plant near her house. She plucked the leaf and chewed it while talking on her phone. However she immediately spat it out. The doctors said that the juice of the leaves might have gone inside.

When Does An Appeal Lie To The Commercial Appellate Division Of The Court? Kerala High Court Discusses

Case Title: Y. Sleebachan v State of Kerala and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 326

The Kerala High Court in a recent order held that appeals will lie in the Commercial Appellate Division of High Court when the order is passed by Commercial Court at the level of a District Judge or by the Commercial Division of the High Court.

Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Harisankar V. Menon said, if the order is passed by a Commercial Court below the level of a District Court, it has to be challenged before the Commercial Appellate Court. Any Act passed by the State Government fixing pecuniary jurisdiction of the appellate Courts would not be tenable.

[KAAPA Act] Preventive Detention Involves Curtailment Of Precious Constitutional Guarantees, High Degree Of Diligence Expected From Authorities: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Geetha v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 327

The Kerala High Court held that authorities are expected to act diligently in matters relating to preventive detention since that involves curtailment of the fundamental rights of citizens.

In the present case, the representation was submitted by the detenu to the government on February 15, 2024, against the detention order. It was considered only on April 08, 2024, after receipt of the report from the Advisory Board on March 19, 2024.

The Division Bench comprising Justice A.Muhamed Mustaque and Justice S Manu held that lethargy, lapses, negligence, delay and callousness on the part of the authorities in considering representations in preventive detention cases violates Article 22 (5) of the Constitution of India.

Writ Court Has Power To Grant Installments For Payment Of Tax Dues Extending Beyond Installments Provided Under Statute: Kerala High Court

Case Title: M/S. Krishna Holiday Village v The Deputy Commissioner

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw Ker 328

The Kerala High Court has held that the Writ Court has the power to grant instalments, extending beyond the instalments granted by the assessing authority for clearing tax dues under Rule 30 B of the Kerala General Sales Tax (KGST), 1963.

As per Rule 30B of the KGST Rules, the assessing authority can permit payment of tax in not more than six monthly instalments based on the request of the dealer.

Justice Murali Purushothaman observed that the writ court invoking its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution has the power to grant instalment facilities extending beyond instalments granted by the assessing authority under Rule 30B of the KGST Rules.

Misconception That Anticipatory Bail Could Be Granted If Custodial Interrogation Was Not Required: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Prabhakaran P. V State Of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw Ker 329

The Kerala High Court held that it is a common misconception that anticipatory bail could be granted if custodial interrogation was not required. The Court stated that custodial interrogation was just one factor to consider when deciding on an anticipatory bail application.

Justice A. Badharudeen stated that the Court has to consider if a prima facie case was made out against the accused, the nature of the offence and the severity of punishment while considering anticipatory bail applications.

Judge Not Initiating Summary Contempt Proceedings Doesn't Bar Court From Initiating Suo Moto Proceedings: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Suo Moto v Yeshwanth Shenoy

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw Ker 330

The Kerala High Court has held that if a Judge didn't initiate contempt proceedings in accordance with the procedure as laid down under Section 14 of the Contempt of Courts Act, it does not bar the High Court from initiating suo moto contempt proceedings under Section 15 of the Act.

The Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice G. Girish made this observation while deciding the challenge made by Advocate Yeshwanth Shenoy against the contempt proceedings initiated against him.

[KEAM 2024] Scribe Can Be Someone Who Has Completed Matriculation But Not Completed 12th Standard: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Jewel Roshan T v Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 331

The Kerala High Court has permitted a candidate who has 90 per cent permanent physical disability to attend the Kerala Engineering Architectural Medical Examination (KEAM), 2024 with the help of a scribe who has completed matriculation and had not completed 12th standard.

The KEAM, 2024 exam will begin today.

Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. ordered thus:

“Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.3 to permit the petitioner to attend the examination through the help of a scribe who has the qualification referred to above, i.e. a matriculate and had not completed 12th standard.”

[S.482 CrPC] Staying Investigation When FIR Read With FIS/Compliant Disclose Cognizable Offence Is Grave Injustice To Victim: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Vignesh Kumar Balasundar v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw Ker 332

The Kerala High Court has held that the power to quash a First Information Report (FIR) under Section 482 of CrPC should be exercised by the Court with caution for ex debito justitiae, that is for the advancement of justice.

The Court stated that quashing FIR or dropping charges is not legally permissible if the FIR read along with FIS/complaint disclose the commission of a cognizable offence. It stated that the Court should dismiss the petition challenging the FIR so as to enable the investigating officer to continue with the investigation and to ascertain the truth by collecting evidence.

Justice A. Badharudeen said that staying FIR when the commission of the cognizable offence is disclosed would cause injustice to the aggrieved or victim. It stated that staying FIR would halt the investigation process and prevent the investigating officer from collecting further evidence thereby giving an opportunity to the accused to destroy material evidence and to escape from punishment.

S.145 Evidence Act | Witness Not Expected To Accurately Recall Sequence Of Rapid Events, Minor Errors In Testimony Not Contradiction: Kerala HC

Case Title: Chandanapurath Rajeevan and Another v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 333

The Kerala High Court has reiterated that Section 162 of Code of Criminal Procedure enables the accused to use the statement of a witness to contradict him in the manner provided by Section 145 of the Indian Evidence Act only. The second part of Section 145 says that when a statement is used to contradict a witness, his attention must be called to those parts which are used to contradict him.

The Court further observed that minor discrepancies in the statements does not amount to contradiction. Such discrepancies can occur due to normal errors of observations or normal errors of memory due to lapse of time. The Court added that such discrepancies will always be there, however honest and truthful the witness is. The witness is not expected to correctly recall the sequence of events in rapid succession or in a short span of time. Some variance with the former statement is not enough. Only if the former statement can discredit the later statement, the witness can be contradicted.

[Actress Assault Case] Kerala High Court Imposes Rs 25K Cost On Pulsar Suni For Filing 10th Bail Application

Case Title: Sunil N S v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 334

The Kerala High Court on Monday dismissed the 10th bail application filed by Sunil N.S., also known as 'Pulsar Suni', the main accused in the 2017 Actor Assault Case.

Justice P.V.Kunhikrishnan also imposed a cost of rupees twenty-five thousand upon him for filing "bail application after bail application". While imposing the cost, the Court noted that the 10th bail application was filed within three days of dismissing his earlier bail application.

Kerala Public Service Commission Can Fill Vacancies That Arise During Validity Of Rank List: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Sijo Thomas v State of Kerala and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 335

The Kerala High Court has declared that Rule 14 in the PSC Rules of Procedure empowers the Commission to fill vacancies notified as well as arising from the ranked list during its validity. Rule 14 says that the Commission shall advise candidates for all the vacancies reported and pending before them and the vacancies which may be reported to them for the period during which the rank lists are kept alive.

The Division Bench of Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice S. Manu observed that the notification clearly stated that the vacancies mentioned are provisional and subject to change according to the allotment of seats and due to rising of more vacancies. Therefore, the general principle that 'filling up of vacancies more than that has been notified is illegal' cannot be applied in the facts of the case at hand.

Claim For Sales Tax Exemption In Respect Of Transit Sales To Be Justified By Showing Sale As Having Occurred In Transit: Kerala High Court

Case Title: M/S.I.T.I.LTD Versus State Of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 336

The Kerala High Court has held that a claim for exemption in respect of transit sales must be justified by showing the sale as having occurred in transit.

The bench of Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. has observed that the petitioner/assessee cannot establish the transit sales by showing the sale as having occurred in transit since the E1 Forms relied on by the assessee have been accounted for only in a subsequent year, which could only be after the transportation of the goods and not while the goods were in transit.

Maternity Benefit Applicable To Private Medical Institutions With Effect From March 6, 2020 Only: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Chairman, PSM College of Dental Sciences & Research v Reshma Vinod and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 337

The Kerala High Court has held that the Maternity Benefit Act is not applicable to private educational institutions before 06.03.2020. The Court noted that the State Government issued a gazette notification under Section 2(b) of the Act making the Act applicable to private educational institutions only on 6th March 2020.

The matter came before Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh in a Writ Petition. The plea was filed by a Dental College and Research Centre. The college was served with a notice from the inspector under the Maternity Benefit Act alleging non-payment of maternity benefits to Reshma Vinod. The petitioner submitted a reply to this. However, an order was passed by the Inspector directing the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. 64,393.56 to Reshma as a maternity benefit and medical bonus. This order was appealed by the institution under S.17(3) of the Act which was dismissed.

[S.34 IPC] Mere Participation Or Sharing Same Intention Independent Of Each Other Not Sufficient, Prearranged Plan Has To Be Proved: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Shafeek v State of Kerala & Connected Cases

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw Ker 338

The Kerala High Court has held that mere participation in an offence would not be sufficient to attribute common intention unless it was proved that they shared a premeditated plan. The Court stated that common intention has to be proved through the conduct of the accused, surrounding circumstances or other incriminating evidence.

In the facts of the case, three accused have approached the Court aggrieved by their conviction of life imprisonment ordered by the Sessions Court for allegedly committing a murder.

The Division Bench comprising Justice P B Suresh Kumar and Justice M B Snehalatha upheld the conviction of the first accused and set aside the conviction of the second and third accused on the finding that they did not possess a premeditated plan and common intention to cause the murder.

Doctrine Of 'Paternity' By Estoppel: Kerala High Court Says Child's Parentage Can't Be Challenged When Conduct Proves Otherwise

Case Title: A J Stephen v Rosemariya

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 339

The Kerala High Court has held that it is not permissible for a man to challenge the paternity of a child when his conduct proves otherwise.

The facts of the case were that in 2022, the petitioner approached the Family Court seeking DNA test stating that he reasonably suspects the minor child's paternity. The Family Court observed that the petitioner suppressed material fact that he had entered into an agreement with the child's mother wherein he accepted the paternity. It thus dismissed petitioner's prayer to undergo DNA test. Aggrieved by this, the petitioner approached the High Court under Article 227 seeking a declaration that he was not the father of the minor child.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and Justice P M Manoj applied the principle of doctrine of Paternity by Estoppel by relying on by Pennsylvania Supreme Court in T.E.B. v. C.A.B. v. P.D.K. Jr. to state that if a man cannot be permitted to deny child's parentage if he has held out be a child's father through his conduct.

Separate Calculation Of Gratuity Amount For Parent Service And Deputation Service Impermissible: Kerala High Court

Case Title: S. Kamaladharan v Kerala Shipping and Inland Corporation Ltd. And Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 340

The Kerala High Court has held that the total gratuity payable to an employee has to be calculated based on the monthly salary last drawn by the employee immediately preceding his termination, irrespective of the deputation service of the employee.

In the Writ Petition, the question to be decided was how much amount the company should contribute towards the gratuity of its deputed employee. S. Kamaladharan retired from Kerala Shipping and Inland Navigation Corporation on 30/11/2014. He worked for a period of 7 years and 10 months in Kerala Tourism Development Corporation (KTDC) on deputation.

Time Limit To Avail ITC Is Till 30th November In Each Financial Year From Beginning Of GST Regime: Kerala High Court

Case Title: M/S M.Trade Links Versus Union Of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 341

The Kerala High Court has held that the time limit to avail ITC is November 30th in each financial year from the beginning of the GST regime.

The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh has observed that prior to the amendment in Section 39 by the Finance Act 2022, the date for furnishing the return under Section 39 was September 30th. Considering the difficulties in the initial stage of the implementation of the GST regime, the Legislature made the amendment and extended the time for filing the return from September to November 30th in each succeeding financial year. The amendment is only procedural to ease the difficulties initially faced by the dealers and taxpayers. Therefore, for the period from 01.07.2017 till 30.11.2022, if a dealer has filed the return after September 30 and the claim for ITC was made before November 30, the claim for ITC of such dealer should also be processed if he is otherwise entitled to claim the ITC.

S.17A Prevention Of Corruption Act | Lack Of Sanction Not Bar When Constitutional Court Orders Enquiry Against Public Servant: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Bindulal V. S. & Others v State of Kerala and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 342

The Kerala High Court has reiterated that when a Constitutional Court passes an order to conduct enquiry or investigation into an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, Section 17A of the Act does not operate as a bar.

The Court observed that prior approval under Section 17A is only required when the alleged offence is relatable to any recommendation made or decision taken by a public servant in discharge of his public duty. It referred to Shankara Bhat and Others v State of Kerala and Others which held that any offence, acts which on the face of it constitutes an offence or demand of illegal consideration cannot be treated as offence related to any recommendation made or decision taken by a public servant. The Court held that it cannot hold that the allegations are related to any recommendations made or decision taken by a public servant.

Right Of Choice: Kerala High Court Refuses To Put "Fetters" On Adult Woman's Decision To Live Separately From Parents

Case Title: xxx v Director General of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 343

The Kerala High Court has held that it has to recognize the right of 'choice' of an adult woman and no fetters can be placed on her decision to live her life in the manner she desires. It stated that the court or family members cannot substitute their opinions and preferences for those of an adult.

The father of the woman in this case had filed a habeas corpus petition for her release from alleged unauthorized custody of the 5th and 6th respondent women.

As such, the Court stated that no restrictions could be imposed upon the daughter regarding her choice or the place where she should stay.

S.77 Customs Act Mandates Declaration Of Contents Of Not Just Baggage, But Also Posts And Couriers: Kerala High Court

Case Title: The Assistant Commissioner v Anis Mohammed Hussain

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 344

The Kerala High Court has held that Section 77 of the Customs Act, which obliges every owner of a baggage to make a declaration of its contents to the customs officer for the purpose of clearing it, deals with the declaration of contents of not just baggage but also posts and couriers.

The Court stated that the respondents did not mention in the pass that the article they brought was Dexamethasone. It stated that Dexamethasone is a dutiable item as per the Customs Tariff Act of 1975. Thus, the Court held that respondents would have complied with Section 77 of the Customs Act if they had informed customs officer that they carried Dexamethasone.

Parental Love Or Concern Can't Fluster An Adult's Right To Choose The Person She Wants To Marry: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Althaf J. Muhammed v The District Police Chief and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 345

“Parental love or concern cannot be allowed to fluster the right of choice of an adult in choosing a man to whom she gets married,” the Kerala High Court has observed.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice P. M. Manoj made the observation while deciding a habeas corpus petition filed by the woman's partner.

The Court referred to Supreme Court judgment, Shafin Jahan v Asokan K. M. and observed that the role of the Court is to see that the detenu is produced before it, find about his/her independent choice and see to it that the person is released from illegal restraint. The choice of an individual should be conferred with the status that the Constitution guarantees, provided that the said choice does not transgress any valid framework, it added

Kerala High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail To Mohiniyattam Performer Booked For Making Alleged Casteist Remarks Against Fellow Artist

Case Title: Sathyabhama v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 346

The Kerala High Court rejected the anticipatory bail application moved by Mohiniyattam Performer Kalamandalam Sathyabhama for making casteist remarks against fellow artist Dr. RLV Ramakrishnan.

Justice K Babu observed that the prosecution has prima facie established that Sathyabhama intentionally made such remarks to humiliate Ramakrishnan for belonging to the Scheduled Caste Community.

The allegation was that Sathyabhama intentionally made certain comments on the appearance and skin tone of Ramakrishnan, who belongs to the Scheduled Caste community, without explicitly taking his name in an interview given to a 'DNA You Tube' Channel.

The Court further stated that the SC/ST (POA) Act was enacted to uphold constitutionally guaranteed rights to all individuals, particularly aiming to bridge the disparities faced by those subjected to ostracism and discrimination. It stated that achieving a casteless society would remain elusive unless the provisions of the SC/ST Act were enforced strictly. The Court stated that exclusion based on caste identity should not be allowed to prevail in our democracy and that citizens must strive to achieve fraternity amongst all sections of society.

Consider Objections To Ban On 'Dangerous & Ferocious' Dog Breeds: Kerala High Court To Ministry Of Animal Husbandry

Case Title: Limjith K J v Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 347

The Kerala High Court has directed the Ministry of Fisheries and Animal Husbandry to consider the objections submitted by stakeholders while considering a writ petition challenging the circular dated March 12, 2024, issued by the Union Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying Department, which bans the rearing of around 23 breeds of dogs on the ground of them being ferocious and dangerous to human life. The writ petition was filed by certain dog lovers who were also owners of such breeds of dogs.

The Court noted that similar writ petitions were filed in Karnataka and Delhi alleging that the circular was issued without consulting or inviting objections and suggestions from stakeholders. The Delhi High Court quashed the circular and held that all stakeholders would be heard for raising their objections before the issuance of a fresh circular. The Delhi High Court had stated that Central Government shall issue a public notice in a national newspaper as well as on the Ministry's official website inviting written objections to the proposed or draft notification to the rules since it would not be possible to give an oral hearing to every dog owner. A similar view was taken by the Karnataka High Court also.

[Recruiting Indian Citizens In Russian Army] Mother Of Commission Agent Approaches Kerala High Court Seeking Protection From CBI Probe

Case Title: xxx v Superintendent of Police, CBI

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 348

A 65-year-old mother has invoked the writ jurisdiction of the Kerala High Court seeking protection from the probe of the CBI alleging that her son was involved in trafficking Indian nationals to Russia.

Justice Devan Ramachandran stated that the petitioner can be summoned for investigation only by issuing a notice. The Court further stated that if later the petitioner is being arrayed as an accused, the authorities can proceed investigation as per law.

The specific allegation is that the petitioner's son along with the other accused was involved in the trafficking of Indian citizens to Russia on the pretext of getting better and high-paying jobs in the Russian Army. It is alleged that traffickers seize the passports of Indian nationals on reaching Russia and they are given training in combat roles and provided with the uniform of the Russian army. It is further alleged that the traffickers deploy Indian nationals at war front bases in the Russia-Ukraine war zone.

Regulatory Authorities Can't Misinterpret Judgments Erroneously To Deny Registration To Permanent Employees: Kerala High Court

Case Name : Jomon Sebastian & Ors vs. Assistant Labour Officer & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 349

A single judge bench of the Kerala High Court comprising of Justice Murali Purushothaman, while deciding Writ Petitions in the case of Jomon Sebastian & Ors vs. Assistant Labour Officer & Ors, held that regulatory bodies cannot misinterpret judgments to wrongfully deny registration to the permanent employees.

The petitioners are headload workers employed by the traders in shops located at the Agricultural Urban Wholesale Market, Maradu. The Wholesale Market is administered by the Urban Wholesale Market Authority constituted by the Government of Kerala, with the District Collector, Ernakulam, serving as the Chairman. The Kerala Headload Workers (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Scheme, 1983 (Scheme), was implemented in the Wholesale Market.

The petitioners submitted applications for registration under Rule 26A of the Kerala Headload Workers Rules. However, their applications were rejected by the registering authority, citing various reasons, including the implementation of the 1983 Scheme and the engagement of pool workers for loading and unloading work in the market. The appellate authority also upheld the decision of registering authority, citing a judgment (Ext. P128(a)) concerning police protection for traders against pool workers.

The court further observed that unattached pool workers have no right to object to the grant of registration to attached workers, and their objections can only be raised when an attached worker seeks to join the scheme as a registered but unattached worker

Kerala High Court Declines Minor Girl's Plea Seeking Pilgrimage To Sabarimala Temple Due To Issues Pending Before SC's Larger Bench In Review Petition.

Case Title: Snigdha Sreenath (Minor) v Travancore Devaswom Board

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 350

The Kerala High Court today dismissed the writ petition of a 10-year-old minor girl who invoked its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a declaration that she was entitled to have a pilgrimage to Sabarimala Temple during the Mandala Pooja/Makaravilakku season of 1199 ME(2023-24) without insisting on upper age qualification.

The writ petition was filed through her father and legal guardian seeking a writ of mandamus to the Travancore Devaswom Board to permit the girl to have her pilgrimage since she has not attained puberty.

The Court stated that the petitioner would have to wait until the issues have been finally decided by the Larger Bench of the Apex Court in the Sabarimala Review Petition. It stated that one of the issues to be considered by the Larger Bench in Kantararu Rajeevaru (Right to Religion, In re-9 J.) v. Indian Young Lawyers Association (2020) was regarding the interplay between freedom of religion under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution and other provisions in Part III, particularly Article 14.

[S.216 CrPC] Alteration Of Charge Is A Vested Right Of Court, Within Its Domain And Not That Of The Parties: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Aswathy K. P. @ Aswathy v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 351

The Kerala High Court reiterated that the power of alteration of charges under Section 216 of the CrPC is the vested power of the Court, and could be exercised at any time before judgment is pronounced.

In the facts of the case, the revision petitioner is challenging the order of the Assistant Sessions Judge that allowed an application for alteration of the charge moved by the Public Prosecutor. The Assistant Sessions Judge altered the charge against the revision petitioner from Section 304 of the IPC (punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder) to an offence punishable under Section 302 (punishment for murder) of the IPC.

Accused 'Exploited Vulnerability': Kerala High Court Sentences Four To 30 Yrs Rigorous Imprisonment For Gang Rape Of Migrant Woman

Case Title: Athul v State of Kerala & Connected Cases

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 352

The Kerala High Court has convicted four accused to rigorous imprisonment of 30 years under Section 376D of the IPC for committing the offence of gang rape on a migrant woman worker in 2015.

The Division Bench comprising Justice A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. relying upon the Apex Court decision in Patan Jamal Vali v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2021), considered the intersectional identity and vulnerability of the victim who was a migrant worker on whom sexual assault was committed.

Husband Acquitted From Offence Of Dowry Death U/S 304B IPC Can Be Held Guilty Of Marital Cruelty U/S 498A Depending On Facts: Kerala HC

Case Title: N. Ansari v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 353

The Kerala High Court has held that just because a person was charged and acquitted under Section 304B of Indian Penal Code for dowry death does not mean that he cannot be convicted under Section 498-A of the Act for marital cruelty.

The judgment was made by Justice Johnson John while deciding a Criminal Appeal against the decision of Sessions Judge where he found the appellant guilty of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The Sessions Court found the accused not guilty under Section 304B and abetment of suicide under Section 306.

Kerala High Court Directs Probe Against Former DGP For Allegedly Disclosing Identity Of Sooryanelli Rape Victim In His Book 'Nirbhayam'

Case Title: K K Joshwa v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 354

The Kerala High Court has directed the Station House Officer, Mannanthala Police Station to review the complaint lodged by the petitioner against former DGP and author Siby Mathews alleging the commission of an offence under Section 228 A of IPC. The Court directed the SHO to conduct a preliminary investigation to determine whether Siby Mathews has disclosed the details of the identity of the rape victim in the Sooryanelli case in his book 'Nirbhayam', potentially committing a cognizable offence warranting registration of FIR.

Nirbhayam is a book written by former DGP of Kerala, Siby Mathews which entails details of his service as a police officer in Kerala. It was alleged that he disclosed the details of the identity of the minor rape victim who was raped by several accused persons during 1996 without specifically taking her name. It was alleged that the book contains a chapter captioning 'Sooryanelli case' and has used terms like 'peedippikkapetta penkutti' meaning sexual assault victim.

State Bound To Ensure That When Public Properties Are Used For Any Purpose, It Is Done In A Manner Which Is Least Inconvenient To Its Subjects: Kerala HC

Case Title: Elsy Abraham v State of Kerala and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw Ker 355

The Kerala High Court in a writ petition has decided on the balance of rights of travellers in the public pathway and that of private persons in adjoining property in relation to the construction of structures near public roads.

Justice M. A. Abdul Hakim held that constructions which are necessary for the maintenance of the users of the pathway can be made on public land, but, care should be taken to ensure that only minimum injury or inconvenience is caused to the affected private party.

Arbitration Clause Valid But Unilateral Appointment Part Is Invalid: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Travancore Rural Development Producer Company Ltd. Vs Divya Lakshmi Sanal And Ors

Citation : 2024 Live Law Ker 356

The Kerala High Court bench of Justice G. Girish has held that arbitration clauses with provisions for the unilateral appointment of an arbitrator cannot be entirely rejected due to this defect. It held that the clauses are to be considered valid arbitration clauses except for those portions which confer the authority upon one party to unilaterally appoint arbitrators.

The High Court held that the arbitration clauses in the agreements did not align with the legal provisions prohibiting unilateral appointments of arbitrators. Nevertheless, it held that these arbitration clauses should not be completely discarded due to this defect. The High Court held that these clauses remained valid as arbitration agreements, with the exception of the portions granting the applicant unilateral appointment authority.

[Walayar Rape-Death Case] Govt Should Consider Request Of Victim Or Victim's Representatives While Appointing Public Prosecutor: Kerala High Court

Case Title: XXX v Union Of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 357

The Kerala High Court has held that the Government should consider the request of the victim or representatives of the victim while appointing a Public Prosecutor or Special Public Prosecutor.

Justice A. Badharudeen observed that the absolute power to appoint a Public Prosecutor or Special Public Prosecutor is with the Government but that do not mean that it should completely negate the request of the victim or representatives of the victim while making such appointments.

[S.498A IPC] Offence Committed Abroad Can't Be Tried In India Without Centre's Sanction U/S 188 CrPC: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Darvin Dominic v State Of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 358

The Kerala High Court has held the Trial Court should not proceed with criminal prosecution under Section 498A of the IPC without previous sanction from the Central Government when an offence of marital cruelty was entirely committed outside India by an Indian National.

Justice A. Badharudeen thus quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against the husband under Section 498A IPC for want of previous sanction from the Central Government under Section 188 CrPC.

While Ordering Maintenance Under Domestic Violence Act, Magistrate Must Specify Whether It Is Being Provided Under CrPC Or HAMA: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Shilpa v K K Rajeevan

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 359

The Kerala High Court held that the Magistrate whilst ordering maintenance to the daughter under Section 20 (1) (d) of the Domestic Violence Act should specify if the maintenance order is made under Section 125 of CrPC or Section 20 (3) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA).

The Court stated that the Magistrate could order monthly maintenance to the daughter under Section 20 (1) (d) of the DV Act. It stated that the maintenance order under the DV Act could be ordered either under Section 125 of CrPC or Section 20 (3) of the Maintenance Act.

Further, the Court held that if a maintenance order was made under Section 125 CrPC, then the maintenance payment would cease when the daughter attained the age of majority. As per Section 125 CrPC, a major unmarried daughter is not entitled to maintenance unless she is suffering from physical or mental abnormality due to which she cannot maintain herself. It stated that Section 125 CrPC is secular and applicable to all so it cannot be assumed that maintenance would not be ordered under Section 125 CrPC

[S. 197 CrPC] Police Officials Can't Be Prosecuted Without Govt's Sanction Even If They Exceed Scope Of Power While On Official Duty: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Joji Joseph v State of Kerala & Connected Matters 

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 360

The Kerala High Court has held that police officials cannot be prosecuted for an act done during the discharge of their official duty without taking sanction from the government under Section 197 CrPC.

Justice P.G. Ajithkumar ordered that sanction would be necessary under Section 197 of CrPC if the alleged act was directly concerned with official duty or has reasonable nexus with the discharge of official duty, even if such alleged act involves manhandling or detaining persons illegally.

The Court further stated sanction would not be required if an offence was committed by the police officer entirely outside the scope of his duty as a police officer.

Road Accident | Contributory Negligence Cannot Be Inferred From Scene Mahazar Alone: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Raju K. J. v Deepak T. V. and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 361

The Kerala High Court, in an appeal against an order of the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal, held that contributory negligence cannot be fixed based on the scene mahazar alone. It can be relied on if there is a police charge alleging contributory negligence or evidence to support the mahazar.

The court however referred to Jiju Kuruvila & Others v Kunjunjumma Mohan to hold that no inference of contributory negligence can be drawn from scene mahazar.

[NDPS Act] Before Conducting Search Of Person, Accused Must Be Informed Of Right To Seek Presence Of Magistrate Or Gazetted Officer: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Sipahi Kumar v State of Kerala, Jaymangal Shah v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw Ker 362

A single bench of Justice Mary Joseph of the Kerala High Court has held that before conducting the body search of a person, the person has to be informed of his right to have the presence of either the Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer to witness his body search.

The Court observed that unless he was informed of his right in the way he understands, the formalities under Section 50 of the Narcotics and Psychotropic Substance Act (NDPS Act) cannot be deemed to have been fulfilled.

Failure Of Assessee To Update E-Mail Address With Dept.; Kerala High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Demand Notice

Case Title: Lakeshore Hospital And Research Centre Limited Versus The Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax/ Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 363

The Kerala High Court has dismissed the writ petition challenging the assessment order and notice of demand on the grounds that they were issued in violation of the principles of natural justice.

The bench of Justice Murali Purushothaman has observed that when the petitioner-assessee is at fault, as they did not update or change the email address with the Department, they cannot legitimately complain that there is a violation of the principles of natural justice.

Prerogative Of Govt. To Fix Income Limit For Encashment Of Earned Leave Salary For Income Tax Exemption: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Balan Panicker Ramesh Kumar Versus Union Of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 364

The Kerala High Court has held that it is the prerogative of the government to fix the limit of income from the encashment of earned leave salary for the purposes of exemption from payment of income tax. Unless the government issues a notification fixing the limit of income for earned leave salary, an employee cannot claim exemption from payment of income tax on the encashment of earned leave for up to 300 days.

The bench of Justice Murali Purushothaman has observed that the last notification was issued on May 31, 2002, and the government did not thereafter issue a notification despite there having been three pay revisions. The latest notification is only in 2023, after which the upper limit has been fixed at Rs. 25 lakhs, taking the highest salary of the cabinet secretary, i.e., Rs. 2.5 lakhs per month.

[S.482 CrPC] During Quashing Proceedings, Court Has Duty To Look At Overall Circumstances To Assess Whether Criminal Case Was Initiated Maliciously: Kerala HC

Case Title: Jitha Sanjay v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 365

The Kerala High Court has held that while exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 of CrPC to quash criminal proceedings, the court owes a duty to look into attending and overall circumstances above the averments made in the FIR or complaint to assess whether criminal proceedings were initiated maliciously.

Justice A. Badharudeen observed that criminal proceedings initiated with ulterior and malafide motives to wreak vengeance due to personal or private grudges cannot be allowed to continue.

Delay In Approaching Revision Authority Under Income Tax Act Can't Be Condoned: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Equity Intelligence India Pvt. Ltd Versus PCIT

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 366

The Kerala High Court has held that the delay in approaching the revision authority under the Income Tax Act cannot be condoned.

The bench of Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. has observed that it was the same aspect of delay or limitation that prevented the Department from re-assessing the income of the appellant for the assessment years 2004–2005 and 2005–2006, respectively.

Court Can Look Beyond FIR To Quash Criminal Proceedings When They Are Vexatious Or Frivolous In Nature, Instituted To Wreak Vengeance: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Jitha Sanjay and Others v State of Kerala and Other

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw(Ker) 367

Justice A. Badharudeen of the Kerala High Court has held that the Court can look beyond an FIR to quash the criminal proceedings when they are manifestly vexatious, frivolous or instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance. The Court observed that when the complainant is motivated due to extraneous reasons, he can make sure that the FIR contains the necessary ingredients of the alleged offence.

“Therefore, it will not be just enough for the Court to look into the averments made in the FIR/ complaint alone for the purpose of ascertaining whether the necessary ingredient to constitute the alleged offence are disclosed or not. In frivolous or vexatious proceedings, the Court owes a duty to look into many other attending circumstances emerging from the record of the case and above averments and, if need be, with due care and circumspection try to read between the lines,” the Court said.

Kerala High Court Allows Dealer To Correct Copy Of Stock Inventory Uploaded Along With Returns

Case Title: Usha Bagri Versus The Assistant Commissioner

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 368

The Kerala High Court has allowed the dealer to correct a copy of stock inventory uploaded along with returns.

The bench of Justice Gopinath P. has observed that the mistake on the part of the petitioner-dealer was that she uploaded the stock inventory as of May 28, 2015, instead of the stock inventory as of March 31, 2015. The provisions of sub-rule (4A) of Rule 22 should be interpreted as permitting the dealer to also revise or correct any mistake in the documents uploaded along with returns under Rule 22 (1), as any other interpretation would mean that while the dealer is permitted to revise his return on detecting a mistake, he cannot correct a mistake in any of the documents uploaded along with the returns.

Absence Of Incriminating Materials, AO Not Empowered To Reopen Assessments In Block Period Of Six Years: Kerala High Court

Case Title: M/S. Sunny Jacob Jewellers Gold Hyper Market Versus CIT

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 369

The Kerala High Court has held that based on the material obtained during the search, the Assessing Officer, who gets the jurisdiction to re-open the assessments, can do so in respect of the individual assessment years comprised in the block period of six years only if the material obtained during the search under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, or any part thereof, relates to the assessment year in question.

Disciplinary Proceedings Against Employee For Messages In Company's WhatsApp Group Expressing Safety Concerns Violates Right To Free Speech: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Sujith T. V. v Fertilisers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd. And Others

Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 370

The Kerala High Court has declared that an employee's messages in a private WhatsApp group regarding the safety of the company do not give rise to the charge of harming the reputation of the company. Justice Satish Ninan said that a charge to such effect infringes on the employee's right to freedom of speech guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

The petitioner is an employee of Fertilisers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd. (FACT). It was submitted that he sent messages to a private WhatsApp group of the technicians of the company regarding the safety concerns related to ammonia handling.

Right Of Accused To Adduce All Evidence Is Part Of Fair Procedure, Refusal To Summon Defence Witnesses Should Be Exercised Sparingly: Kerala HC

Case Title: Muhammed Sahir v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 371

The Kerala High Court held that the Trial Court's denial of issuing summons to defence witnesses, as requested by the accused during a criminal trial should be an exception and to be used sparingly.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas held that the right of the accused to enter defence evidence and adduce witnesses is essential to ensure fair procedure under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Sabrimala Airport Construction | Land Acquisition Notice To Be Withdrawn, Fresh Social Impact Study To Be Conducted: Govt Tells Kerala High Court

Case Title: Ayana Charitable Trust (formerly known as Gospel for Asia) v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 372

The Kerala High Court has recorded the submissions made by the Advocate General on behalf of the State Government that it has proposed to withdraw the notifications issued under Section 11(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for the acquisition of Cheruvally Estate in Kottayam for construction and development of the Sabarimala Greenfield Airport.

Justice Viju Abraham also recorded the submission of the State Government that it has decided to conduct a Social Impact Assessment study through a different agency and fresh notifications will be issued in this regard by the Government under Section 4 (1) of the 2013 Act.

Kerala High Court Quashes Special Judge's "Unwarranted Remarks" Against IAS Officer, Says Unnecessary Enquiries Blemish Public Servant's Career

Case Title: State of Kerala v Muraleedharan K. V.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw(Ker) 373

The Kerala High Court recently criticised the "casual approach" of a Special Judge appointed under the Prevention of Corruption Act for wrongly making adverse observations against an IAS officer, then serving as the Additional Chief Secretary in the State's Revenue department.

Single bench of Justice K. Babu observed that “A special Judge functioning under the PC Act must be conscious of his responsibilities and obligations. Even an unnecessary preliminary enquiry may cause a blemish in the career of a public servant.”

Statutory Scheme Determining Taxable Turnover Of Works Contract Under KVAT Act Doesn't Suffer From Any Defect: Kerala High Court

Case Title: M/S. DLF Home Developers Limited Versus State Of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 374

The Kerala High Court has held that the statutory scheme for determining the taxable turnover of a works contract under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act (KVAT Act) does not suffer from any defect so as to render it unworkable to effectuate the charge to tax on a works contract.

The bench of Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Syam Kumar V. M. has observed that it was incumbent upon the petitioner or assessee to declare the total turnover (contract receipts) pertaining solely to the works undertaken by them without including the component representing the value of the undivided share in the land. If the petitioner assessees choose not to do so, they have only themselves to blame for the predicament that they find themselves in.

Donor's Acknowledgement In Gift Deed Of Property's Delivery To Donee Is Sufficient Proof Of Gift's Acceptance: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Kakkoth Radha and Others v Bathakkathalakkal Batlak Musthafa and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw(Ker) 375

The Kerala High Court held that when the registered deed of gift of immovable property mentions that the property was delivered to the donee, it is sufficient to establish acceptance.

The Court also observed that the Transfer of Property Act does not mention any one mode of acceptance.

Justice K. Babu observed:

“It is trite that no particular mode is prescribed under the law as to the requirement needed to prove acceptance. There may be various means to prove acceptance of a gift.”

Accidentally Downloading Pornography Involving Child Not An Offence U/S 67B Information Technology Act: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Sebin Thomas v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 376

The Kerala High Court has held that automatic or accidental downloading of children engaged in sexually explicit act or conduct is not an offence under Section 67B (b) of the Information Technology Act when the evidence shows that there was no specific intent to do so.

In the facts of the case, the petitioner was alleged to have committed offences under Section 15(2) of the POCSO Act and Section 67 B (b) of the Information Technology Act. The specific allegation was that the petitioner stored and possessed pornographic material involving child which was downloaded on his phone from Telegram.

The bench observed that no prima facie case was made out against the petitioner Section 15(2) of the POCSO Act and Section 67 B (b) of the IT Act and held thus: “In the present case, the materials collected during investigation would show that some pornographic messages, which would depict children engaged in sexually explicit act or conduct were found in the devise of the accused. But there are no materials to show that the petitioner intentionally downloaded or browsed or recorded the same. More particularly there are no materials to show that the petitioner had either shared or transmitted or propagated or displayed or distributed the same in any manner.”

Quashing Proceedings Upon Settlement In Heinous Crimes Like Murder & Rape Lacks Legal Sanction, Sends Wrong Signal To Community: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Ivin v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 377

The Kerala High Court held that settling serious and heinous offences involving mental depravity or offences such as murder, rape and dacoity through quashing process by invoking its inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC would seriously impact society and sans legal permissibility.

Justice A. Badharudeen observed that even though the Court has the power to quash proceedings even in non-compoundable offences invoking its inherent powers upon settlement between parties, such powers should be exercised carefully. The Court cautioned that in cases involving serious offences that impact society, the Court must refrain from invoking its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC to dismiss proceedings based on compromises between the parties.

S.52A NDPS Act: Kerala High Court Grants Bail To Accused As Seizure Officer Mixed Alleged Contraband Found In Three Separate Packets

Case Title: Amal v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 378

The Kerala High Court has granted bail to an accused booked under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act for possession of over 100 gms contraband, noting that the Investigating Officer had mixed the content found in three separate packets.

Justice C. S. Dias cited Section 52A of the Act which requires the Investigating Officer to draw separate samples from "each of the packets", that too in the presence of the jurisdictional Magistrate and then, send the representative samples from each packet for chemical analysis.

The bench said that an infraction of the statutory provision by the Investigating Officer had prejudiced the accused and therefore, the rigour on grant of bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act stands diluted.

Delinquent Public Servant Has Right To Be Tried Within Reasonable Time, State Can't Initiate Disciplinary Action After Unexplained Delay: Kerala HC

Case Title: Kishore Kumar J V Additional Chief Secretary & Connected Matter

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 379

The Kerala High Court has made it clear that there is no fair process of enquiry if unexplained delay has occurred in initiating disciplinary proceedings against a delinquent employee, since it causes him significant prejudice.

The Court further stated that the Constitution guarantees the right to a fair trial, which should be ensured not only in criminal cases but also in all cases where procedures are required to indict an individual.

In the facts of the case, a charge memo was filed against an officer in 2022, alleging dereliction of duty in the investigation of a crime he had investigated in 2001, during which he wrongfully arrested innocent persons.

False Implication For Getting Back Money: Kerala High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against Man Accused Of Rape

Case Title: Sakeer v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 380

The Kerala High Court has held that in exceptional cases, the High Court by invoking its inherent powers under Section 482 of CrPC can even quash even criminal proceedings alleging the commission of an offence of rape under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

Justice A. Badharudeen quashed the proceedings against the petitioner pending before the Special Court for the Trial of Cases Relating to Atrocities and Sexual Violence Against Women and Children (POCSO).

In the present case, the Court found that there were financial dealings between the petitioner and the de facto complainant. It also observed that a case was filed against the de facto complainant by the wife of the accused. The Court thus stated that criminal proceedings could be quashed when prosecution materials do not attract the offence alleged to be committed.

No Fundamental Right To Protest Anywhere The Agitator Pleases: Kerala High Court

Case Title: The Federal Bank Ltd. V Federal Bank Officer's Association

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 381

The Bank filed a suit before the Munisff for a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining it's employee union, its members and supporters from obstructing the bank officials and customers from dealing with the bank.

The Single bench of Justice Kauser Edappagath held that the right under Article 19 is not absolute and it must be exercised in a way as not to interfere with the right of the employer to carry on their lawful business. Court said freedom of speech and expression cannot interfere with the right of someone else to enjoy property or carry on business.

Guardian Of Minor Driving Vehicle Without Licence Can Be Prosecuted U/S 199A MV Act Even Before Determining Minor's Guilt: Kerala HC

Case Title: Sharafudheen v State of Kerala & Connected Cases

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 382

The Kerala High Court has held that the guardian of a minor or owner of a vehicle driven by a minor can be prosecuted for offence under Section 199A of the Motor Vehicles Act, even in the absence of finding of guilt of the minor.

The provision prescribes imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years.

Bench of Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas said though commission of an offence under the MV Act by the juvenile is an essential ingredient of Section 199A, however, a finding regarding the commission of an offence under the MV Act by the juvenile is not a sine qua non for initiating proceedings against the guardian or owner of the motor vehicle under the said section.

LGBTQIA+ Individuals Experience Familial Rejection, Crucial To Recognize Family As 'Sites Of Violence' And Grant Protection: Kerala High Court

Case Title: S v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 383

The Kerala High Court recently observed that families can often become sites of violence and control for LGBTIQA+ individuals who they need protection from rather than guardianship. 

The Court observed that LGBTIQA+ persons face defiance in society and are subjected to stigma, violence and discrimination from an early age due to societal beliefs and cultural norms.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and Justice P M Manoj made the observation while dealing with the plea filed by parents of a 23-year-old woman stating that their daughter was illegally detained and living in a 'toxic' relationship with a person of the same gender.

[S.120 Evidence Act] Husband & Wife Can Testify On Behalf Of Each Other Without Executing Power Of Attorney: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Smitha v Anil Kumar

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 384

The Kerala High Court has held that under Section 120 of the Evidence Act, a husband is permitted to testify in lieu of his wife and vice versa even without a written authority or power of attorney.

Justice Kauser Edappagath stated that the Trial Court had wrongly rejected the request for examining the plaintiff's husband for and on her behalf in the trial of a suit.

Merely Because A Person Worked In Pakistan Doesn't Make Him An 'Enemy' Under Rule 130 Of Defence Of India Rules: Kerala High Court

Case Title: P. Ummer Koya v State of Kerala and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 385

The Kerala High Court has held that merely because a person had moved to Pakistan in search of a job does not make him an enemy under Rules 130 and 138 of the Defence of India Rules, 1971 unless he was trading with an enemy. 

Court thus quashed the proceedings initiated under the Enemy Property Act, against a property formerly held by the petitioner's father, who had worked at a hotel in Pakistan.

Must Guard Against Ideological Biases, False Narratives In Terrorism Cases: Kerala HC Grants Bail To 17 PFI Members Accused In RSS Leader's Murder

Case Title: Ashraf @ Asharaf Moulavi v Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 386

The Kerala High Court today held that while considering allegations of terrorism and related offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, the Courts should not get carried away by confirmation bias that might creep in based on ideological biases and false narratives prevalent in the society.

The Court was considering the criminal appeals moved by 26 persons belonging to Popular Front Of India (PFI) who were accused of allegedly murdering RSS Leader Srinivasan at Melamuri Junction in Palakkad Town in Kerala on April 16, 2022.

Home Guards Appointed On Daily Wage Basis, Recruitment And Selection Process Different From Civil Police Officers: Kerala High Court Denies Pay Parity

Case Title: State of Kerala v Ajayakumar V

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 387

The Kerala High Court has stated that Home Guards are appointed on a daily wage basis and their recruitment and selection process differed from that of a Civil Police Officer. The Court further observed that Apex Court in Grah Rakshak, Home Guards Welfare Association vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and Others (2015) had not declared that Home Guards shall be treated at par with Civil Police Officers. 

In this case, aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal in granting parity in pay to Home Guards with that of Police Constable, the State Government has approached the High Court with an appeal.

Domestic Violence Act | Divorced Wife Can't Be Evicted From 'Shared Household' Except With Procedure Established By Law: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Jayasree v Indrapalan and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw(Ker) 388

The Kerala High Court in a recent judgment observed that a former wife, though divorced cannot be evicted from a shared household except through a procedure laid down by law. 

The Court observed that even though a divorced woman had no right over the shared household, if she was staying there during or after divorce, she could be evicted only through a procedure established by law.

No Permission Needed When Minerals Extracted From One's Property Aren't Transported, Only Liability Is To Inform Authorities & Pay Royalty: Kerala HC

Case Title: Rajesh K. The District Geologist and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 389

The Kerala High Court declared that a person need not seek permission while extracting minerals on his property when the mineral is not transported outside the premises of the property. The Court said that he only needs to inform the concerned authorities and pay them a royalty fee for using the granite for construction.

[Kerala Local Authorities Entertainment Tax Act] Entertainment Tax Cannot Be Levied On Unsold Concert Tickets: High Court

Case Title: JTPAC v Maradu Municipality

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 390

The Kerala High Court directed the Municipality under whose jurisdiction a music concert was held to refund the entertainment tax levied on unsold tickets.

Justice Gopinath P. stated that entertainment tax could only be charged under Section 3 of the Kerala Local Authorities Entertainment Tax Act, 1961 towards sold tickets and not on unsold tickets.

After Man Convicted For Wife's Murder Dies, Kerala High Court Dismisses His Appeal Saying Children Would Not Want To Continue

Case Title: Reghunadan v State of Kerala

Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 391

The Kerala High Court has dismissed an appeal as abated after the death of a man convicted for the murder of his wife. 

Division Bench of Justice A. K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Syam Kumar V. M. said that the man's children would not be interested in coming on record to continue the appeal since in a sense, they are also victims of the alleged crime.

[S. 306 IPC] Compliant Filed Before A Lawful Authority Cannot Amount To Abetment To Suicide: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Murali @ Muralidharan V State Of Kerala 

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 392

The Kerala High Court has held that a complaint filed before a lawful authority would not amount to instigation or abetment to suicide under Section 306 of the IPC, since filing such a complaint is not intended to instigate or abet the deceased to commit suicide.

Nothing Confidential About Property Register Kept In Public Office In Modern Era Of Right To Information & Transparency: Kerala High Court

Case Title: P.B.Sourbhan v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 393

The Kerala High Court held that a property register maintained in a public office is not confidential or a record of proceedings to be protected from disclosure as per Rule 225 of Criminal Rules of Practice, Kerala 1982.

The petitioner has approached the High Court challenging the dismissal of his application for obtaining a certified copy of a property register in relation to a property produced in a criminal trial in the Court. His application was dismissed stating that it is a register kept in the office of the court and is a confidential non-judicial record as per Rule 225.

S.311 CrPC | Plea For Examining New Witnesses, Submitting Fresh Documents Should Only Be Allowed To Meet The Ends Of Justice: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Hena Khatoon and Another v State of Kerala and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 394

The Kerala High Court observed that a petition filed at a later point seeking a re-examination of a witness, an examination of a new witness or a summons of new documents can be allowed only to meet the ends of justice. It should not be used to fill the lacuna of evidence, to give advantage to one party or as a disguise for a re-trial, the court said.

Kerala High Court Directs Police Chief To Issue Instructions To Ensure Citizens Are Not Illegally Detained, Arrested Due To Mistaken Identity

Case Title: Shalet v State of Kerala 

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 395

The Kerala High Court has directed the State Police Chief to issue suitable instructions to ensure that citizens are not illegally arrested and detained based on the wrong identity.

In the facts of the case, the petitioner was wrongly detained and arrested by the police in a case of mistaken identity. 

Justice Gopinath P. ordered that the identity of persons should be clearly established before police officials arrest or detain citizens to prevent any illegal invasion into the life and liberty of innocent citizens. 

Credit Available On Advance Tax Paid For Stock-Transferred: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Hillwood Furniture Pvt. Ltd Versus The Assistant Commissioner

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 396

The Kerala High Court has held that the petitioner will be entitled to credit for the entire amount paid in terms of Circular No. 50/2006 for the goods in question, which were stock-transferred to its branch office in Pollachi.

The bench of Justice Gopinath P. has observed that a combined reading of the provisions of Circular No. 50/2006 and the definition of input tax in Section 2(xxiii) of the KVAT Act indicates that the tax paid in terms of Circular No. 50/2006 cannot assume the character of input tax.

Kerala High Court Directs State To Constitute Special Team And Inquire Revenue Officials For Allegedly Forging Title Deeds

Case Title: One Earth One Life v State of Kerala

Case Number: WP(C) NO. 1801 OF 2010 & Connected Cases

The Kerala High Court recently directed the State Government to constitute a Special Team to inquire into forging of title deeds, including taking bribes by revenue officials in Munnar and Idukki districts.

The Division Bench comprising Justice A.Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen directed thus: “Having heard the submission on the learned Special State Prosecutor, we are of the view that a special team consists of high rank officials with the team of others including revenue officials need to be formed to enquire and investigate the nature of involvement of public officials in forging the patta, including any gratification in any form they received.”

Kerala High Court Issues Notice To Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, Daughter Veena In CMRL Pay-Off Case

Case Name: Dr. Mathew A. Kuzhalnadan v Pinarayi Vijayan and Others

Case No: Crl. Rev. Pet. 588/2024

The Kerala High Court today issued notice to Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, daughter Veena Thaikandiyil and other respondents in a revision petition filed by MLA Mathew A Kuzhalnadan against the dismissal of his complaint seeking vigilance enquiry into alleged illegal financial dealings between Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited (CMRL) and Veena's Company Exalogic Solutions.

Special Judge (Vigilance) had rejected the complaint on May 06. Justice K. Babu has issued notice to all the respondent

Kerala High Court Stays Single-Bench Order Which Held 'Malabar Parota' To Be Akin To 'Bread', Eligible To 5% GST

Case Title: State of Kerala v Modern Food Enterprises Private Limited

Case Number: WA NO. 805 OF 2024

A Division Bench of the Kerala High Court has stayed the order of the single bench which held that Malabar 'Parota' was akin to 'bread' and was exigible at the rate of 5% GST and not 18% GST.

The bench comprising Justice A.Muhamed Mustaque and Justice S. Manu ordered thus:

“There shall be a stay of operation of the impugned judgment for a period of two months.”

Plea In High Court Challenges Increased Work Days For Kerala Schools

Case Title: Kerala Pradesh School Teacher's Association And Another v State of Kerala And Others

Case Number: WP(C) 21811/2024

A petition has been moved before the Kerala High Court against the new academic calendar 2024-25 as per which working days in aided and government schools have been enhanced from 205 to 220.

The plea has been moved by the Kerala Pradesh School Teacher's Association, a recognized association of teachers of various government and aided schools.

The matter will be heard by Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. tomorrow.

Kerala High Court Details Procedure By Which Third Party Can File An Application For Certified Copies

Case Title: Suo Moto v Adv. Sojan Pavanios

Case Number: Con. Cas. (Crl.) 6/ 2023

The Kerala High Court has emphasized that High Court Rules require a third-party who is seeking certified copies of any records of the proceedings other than the judgment or decree need to file a petition stating the reason for which the copy is required. The certified copies for these proceedings can be granted to a third party only on the orders of the Court.

A Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Harisankar V. Menon referred to various Supreme Court judgments where the where the necessity of this procedure was explained. It is to ensure that the copies are sought for bona fide purpose or to effectuate public interest. The Court holds the information as a trustee to the litigants. To prevent the misuse of process of law and information, it is necessary to restrict access to that information.

[Pantheerankavu Domestic Violence Case] Husband Accused Of Attempting To Strangle Wife With Cable Wire Moves Kerala High Court To Quash Criminal Proceedings

Case Title: Rahul P. Gopal v State of Kerala

Case Number: Crl.M.C. 5187/2024

The husband and family in the Pantheerankavu Domestic Violence case have approached the Kerala High Court on 19/06/2024 to quash further proceedings in the crime registered against them. The petitioner claimed that the matter had been settled between the de-facto complainant/ wife of the 1st accused and they were ready to live together.

Rahul P. Gopal was accused of domestic violence by his wife. He and his family were booked under Sections 324, 498A, 307 and 212 of the Indian Penal Code. An FIR was registered against them at Pantheerankavu Police Station. The de facto complainant alleged that the 1st accused assaulted her and attempted to strangle her using cable wire.

Dereliction Of Duty: Kerala High Court Criticises Govt Authorities' Failure To Remove Unauthorised Billboards, Levy Fines From Offenders

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

Case No: WP(C) No. 22750/ 2018

The Kerala High Court has taken stern exception to the failure of the authorities to remove unauthorised billboards in the city despite court orders.

A single bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran lamented that in spite of court orders, the concerned authorities were not taking action against unauthorized billboards. The Court noted that the authorities by not collecting the requisite fine was causing loss to the exchequer.

Kerala High Court Issues Circular Enabling Service Of Notice, Summons Through E-Post In Trivandrum

The Kerala High Court has issued a notice to introduce the e-Post service of India Post as a new method for the service of summons/notices/ orders to respondents. In the pilot phase, this facility will be available only in Trivandrum and will be extended to other districts later.

This facility can be used when the Court orders service of notice through e-post or Speed post or when no means of delivery is specified. When the Court specifically orders the service through Registered Post, e-post cannot be used.

Legal Representatives Of Appellant In Second Appeal Are Entitled To Re-Submit Appeal Which Was Returned For Curing Defects: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Appu (Died) and Others v Ajayan and Others

Case Number: Unnumbered R.S.A. (Filing No: 1276 of 2012)

The Kerala High Court has declared that an applicant can resubmit an appeal instituted by a person under whom the applicants claim. The Court clarified that legal representatives of an appellant in a Regular Second Appeal are entitled to re-submit the appeal which was returned for curing the defects.

Justice K. Babu held: “The principle emerges is that the right to file an appeal must be held to carry with it the right to resubmit the appeal which had been instituted by a person under whom the applicants claim.”

Ernakulam Bar Association Moves Kerala High Court For Publication Of Expert Committee's Interim Report Proposing Hike In Court Fees

Case Title: The Ernakulam Bar Association v State of Kerala and Others

Case Number: WP(C) 21910/2024

The Ernakulam Bar Association has moved the Kerala High Court seeking publication of the interim report submitted by Justice VK Mohanan led Expert Committee which formed the basis for proposing revisions to court fees during the 2024 Kerala budget. The proposal includes a 5% increase in court fees for cheque cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act, as well as the introduction of court fees for Family Court petitions.

A bench of Justice TR Ravi admitted the matter and enquired whether the interim report has been published. It has sought instructions from the Government Pleader in this regard.

Kerala High Court Advocates Association Opposes Hike In Court Fees

The Kerala High Court Advocates Association (KHCAA) has submitted their opinion to the Expert Committee headed by Justice V K Mohanan opposing the hike in court fees.

KHCAA stated that they strongly condemned the act of the Government for unilaterally relying upon the Expert Committee recommendations to increase the court fees. It is stated that after implementation of the hike in Court fees, the Expert Committee is now seeking suggestions and opinions through public hearings.

"Callous & Casual Attitude Of State Towards Proceedings" : High Court Slams Kerala Govt For Not Filing Counter-Affidavit

Case Title: P. M. Surendran and Another v Government of Kerala and Others

Case No: WP(C) 3017/ 2018

The High Court in a recent order came down heavily on the State Government for the callous and casual attitude they are having towards the Court proceedings. The Court observed that it is unable to decide a Writ petition filed in 2018 as there is no response from the State.

The Writ in the instance was filed challenging the decision of the Government in nationalizing the Ernakulam- Muvattupuzha route. The issue was whether Government has followed the law while doing so.

Vloggers Recording Video Inside Driver Cabin Of Moving Vehicles To Be Booked Under Motor Vehicles Act: Kerala High Court

Case title: Suo Moto v State of Kerala

Case number: SSCR Nos.29, 30 and 36 of 2023

The Kerala High Court has directed the Enforcement Officers in the Motor Vehicles Department to collect videos of extensively modified and altered vehicles by registered owners or vloggers uploaded on online video platforms like YouTube.

The Court further directed that vloggers who record video inside the driver's cabin of the moving vehicle disturbing the driver's concentration and endangering the safety of road users shall also be proceeded against under the Motor Vehicles Act.

Kerala High Court Directs ED To Retain And Preserve CCTV Footage Of Interrogation Of CMRL Officials

Case Title: WPC 15757/2024

Case Number: M/S. Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited V Directorate of Enforcement

The Kerala High Court passed an order directing the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to preserve and retain the CCTV visuals of the interrogation of officials of Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd (CMRL) who the ED summoned.

It was alleged that CMRL committed cognizable offences warranting investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and a summons was issued to its officials. The ED alleges that CMRL being a public limited company was involved in creation of bogus funds to the tune 1.72 crores for the benefit of certain individuals warranting ED investigation.

Justice T R Ravi directed thus:

“Since there is an allegation that the petitioners were detained by the respondents for more time than that is allowed by the law of the land, there will be an interim direction to preserve and retain the CCTV footage of the interrogation. This order is issued only to ensure that issue is not precipitated due to the delay in the hearing before this Court. This order shall not be understood as an order on merits of the contention."

Kerala High Court Directs Registry To Number Criminal Miscellaneous Cases Only After Producing Witness Statements And Documents Along With Final Report

Case Title: Sajeer Puthiyapurayil v State of Kerala

Case Number: CRL.MC NO. 4711 OF 2022

The Kerala High Court on Monday directed the Registry to number criminal miscellaneous cases only after producing the final report along with witness statements and documents.

Justice A. Badharudeen ordered that the Registry shall comply with the direction strictly.

“In view of the matter, Registry is directed to number Crl.M.Cs only after producing the final report along with witnesses statements and documents, hereinafter. This direction shall be complied strictly hereinafter.”

Kerala High Court Expresses Disinclination To Grant Anticipatory Bail To Mohiniyattam Performer Booked For Casteist Remarks Against Fellow Artist

Case Title: Sathybhama v State of Kerala

Case Number: Crl A 733/2024

The Kerala High Court has reserved for orders the appeal moved by Mohiniyattam performer Kalamandalam Sathyabhama against the dismissal of her anticipatory bail application by the Special Court for Trial of offences under SC/ST Act, for allegedly making casteist remarks against fellow artist Dr. RLV Ramakrishnan.

Justice K Babu today orally said, “I will not grant anticipatory bail, I will direct her to appear before the jurisdictional Court and let the Court decide.”

State Moves Kerala High Court Against Bail Of Accused In SDPI Leader Shan's Murder Case

Case Name: State of Kerala v Rajendra Prasad @ Andi Prasad

Case Number: Crl. M. C. 4707/24

The Kerala government has moved the High Court challenging the grant of bail to Rajendra Prasad, first accused in the murder of Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI) State Secretary K.S. Shan who was hacked to death in December 2021.

The bench of Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas issued notice on the matter and posted it on June 25 along with similar appeals challenging grant of bail to eight other accused.

Kerala HC Stays Single Judge's "Prima Facie" Finding Of Ex-DGP Revealing Rape Victim Identity, Says Police Will Be Forced To Proceed Against Him

Case Title: Siby Mathews v K K Joshwa and Others

Case Number: WA 841/2024

The Kerala High Court has stayed the prima facie observations made by its single bench against former DGP Siby Mathews for commission of an offence under Section 228A IPC by allegedly revealing the identity of the Sooryanelli rape victim in his autobiographical novel 'Nirbhayam'.

The book was published back in 2017. Pursuant to the single judge's order, an FIR was registered.

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice A J Desai and Justice V G Arun said if the observation is not stayed, "there would be no alternative for the investigating agency to proceed further, in accordance with law, in connection with the FIR registered in this case."

Pantheerankavu Domestic Violence Case: Police Oppose Husband's Quashing Plea; Says Wife Was Seriously Injured, Must Have Settled Under Pressure

Case Title: Rahul P. Gopal v State of Kerala

Case Number: Crl.M.C. 5187/2024

The Kerala Police has opposed the quashing petition filed by Rahul P Gopal, accused in the infamous Pantheerankavu domestic violence case, stating that his wife was seriously injured when she came to the police station and the alleged compromise between the parties must be an outcome of pressure and threats.

Rahul allegedly attempted to strangle his wife using cable wire, after she failed to fulfil his dowry demands. The 29-year-old and his family are booked under Sections 324, 498A, 307 and 212 of IPC. His wife however uploaded a YouTube video stating that the allegations against her husband are false.

When Does An Appeal Lie To The Commercial Appellate Division Of The Court? Kerala High Court Discusses

Case Title: Y. Sleebachan v State of Kerala and Another

Case Number: Coml. A. 6/ 2024

The Kerala High Court in a recent order held that appeals will lie in the Commercial Appellate Division of High Court when the order is passed by Commercial Court at the level of a District Judge or by the Commercial Division of the High Court. 

Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Harisankar V. Menon said, if the order is passed by a Commercial Court below the level of a District Court, it has to be challenged before the Commercial Appellate Court. Any Act passed by the State Government fixing pecuniary jurisdiction of the appellate Courts would not be tenable.

22-Yr-Old Differently Abled Person Moves Kerala High Court Seeking Permission To Take Driving License Test

Case Title: Rudranath A S v State of Kerala 

Case Number: WPC No. 23297/ 2024

A 22-year-old, 40 per cent physically disabled citizen has moved the Kerala High Court stating that he has been denied the opportunity to take part in the driving license test.

It is stated that the petitioner's fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 And 21 have been denied by violating his right to equal opportunity. He stated that his right to reputation and right to livelihood is threatened due to the denial of right to participate in the driving license test.

Kerala HC Orders Production Of Transwoman Allegedly Being Forced To Undergo 'Conversion Therapy', Restrains Any Surgeries On Her Till Then

Case Title: Adithya Kiron v Station House Officer and Others

Case Number: WP (Crl.) No 704/ 2024

A Habeas Corpus petition has been moved before the Kerala High Court alleging that a trans woman is being forced to undergo conversion therapy in Amrita Hospital, Kochi.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Amit Rawal and Justice Easwaran S. ordered to produce Elida Rubielle before the Court on Monday. The Court also directed that no surgeries should be performed on her in the meanwhile.

Lawyer Moves Kerala High Court Against Dumping Of Plastic Waste In National Parks, Wildlife Sanctuaries, Tiger Reserves & Forest Areas In State

Case Title: Adv Sunil Kumar A G v State of Kerala & Ors

Case Number: WPC 22966/2024

A lawyer has moved the Kerala High Court against the dumping of garbage and plastic waste in forest areas, national parks, wildlife sanctuaries, Tiger reserves in the State.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction of the authorities in combating plastic pollution into ecologically sensitive and forest areas to prevent environmental pollution. 

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice A J Desai and Justice V G Arun issued notice to the respondents. The Government Pleader took notice on behalf of the State Government, State Police Chief, Department Of Forest, Ministry of Environment and Kerala Forest Development Corporation. The Standing Counsel of the Pollution Control Board took notice for the State Pollution Control Board. 

Can Voters Approach SEC Seeking Disqualification Of Elected Members U/S 4 Of Local Authorities (Prohibition Of Defection) Act: Kerala HC To Consider

Case Title: Baburaj Thottukara v State of Kerala & Others

Case Number: WP(C) 23171/2024

A plea has been moved before the Kerala High Court challenging Section 4 of the Kerala Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 1999 to the extent to which it excludes voters from filing petitions before the State Election Commission for disqualification of an elected member on the grounds of defection.

Kerala High Court Appoints New Special Commissioner For Sabarimala

Case Name: Suo Motu v State of Kerala and Others

Case Number: DBP No: 44/ 2024

The Kerala High Court has appointed Sri. Jayakrishnan R., who is currently the Special Judge for the Trial of Scheduled Caste/ Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Case, Kottarakara as the new Special Commissioner to Sabarimala. This post would be in addition to his duties as the Special Judge.

Officials Of CMRL Prima Facie Liable For Misappropriating Public Money, Cheating General Public: ED Tells Kerala High Court

Case Title: M/S. Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited V Directorate of Enforcement

Case Number: WPC 15757/2024

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) submitted before the Kerala High Court that officials of Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd (CMRL), a public limited company committed cognizable offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and cheated the general public by misappropriating large amounts of public money. It was stated that the proceedings based on the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) registered by the ED against the officials of CMRL cannot be quashed since the inquiry is only at a premature stage.

What Action Taken Against Vloggers Promoted Illegally Modified Vehicles? Kerala High Court Asks Ministry Of Transport

Case title: Suo Moto v State of Kerala

Case number: SSCR Nos.29, 30 and 36 of 2023

The Kerala High Court has sought instructions from the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways about the action against vloggers who promote the use of modified and altered motor vehicles in public places that violate safety standards.

The Government Pleader informed the Court that the Transport Commissioner could appear before the Court on the next posting date, if necessary, to explain the actions taken to prevent the usage of modified vehicles in public places.

The Court noted that despite directions issued by the Court, motor vehicles were being altered and modified violating road safety standards and causing air and noise pollution. It stated that retroreflectors fitted on the rear bumper of motor cars were being replaced by after- market red lights which interferes with the vision of oncoming vehicles and pedestrians. It further stated that vehicles with unauthorized name boards like 'Government of Kerala', 'Kerala State', 'Government of India' were used in public places with unauthorized flashlights and strobe lights to carry Sabarimala pilgrims causing a threat to their safety.

Whatever Be The Provocation, Policemen Cannot Behave Except In A Civil Manner: Kerala High Court

Case title: Mahesh v Anilkant & Connected Matters

Case number: Contempt Case(C) No. 869 OF 2023(S) In WP(C) 11880/2021 & Connected Matters

The Kerala High Court has stated that policemen should behave in a civilized manner, regardless of any provocation they may face. The Court stated that any abhorrent conduct from the policemen against the citizens would not be permitted and will be dealt with by deterrent measures.

Justice Devan Ramachandran directed the Police Chief to appear online for an interaction with the Court on June 26, 2024, at 1.45 PM regarding the steps taken to ensure that the police behave civilly to all citizens.

The Court observed that police should be under watch and there should be no secrecy to ensure that they behave civilly at all times. It stated police should be firm but polite and strong but civil.

The Court thus directed the State Police Chief to look into the matter and decide what kind of action must be taken to regard the police force as a civil one. The Court went on to state that it is very proud of the police force and deemed it as one of the best. However, the Court added that police misbehaviour even from a single officer cannot be permitted since that would tarnish the reputation of the entire force.

Safety Of Pedestrians Paramount: Kerala High Court Directs Ernakulam District Collector To Submit Report On 'Operation Footpath

Case Title: Pauly Vadakkan v Corporation of Cochin and Others

Case Number: WP(C ) 34310/ 2019

The Kerala High Court has directed the Ernakulam District Collector to submit a report on steps taken for footpath safety. This comes after the court took suo moto notice of the incident where a woman's leg got stuck between the slabs of footpath in Kochi. She did not sustain any injury.

Single bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran observed that taking steps for footpath safety was important now especially due to the heavy rains. The citizens would not be able to differentiate between road and footpath area due to the flooding. The Court observed that when it talk about roads, attention should also go to pedestrian areas.

The Court observed that urban planning and development requires to consider the safety of pedestrians also. The Court declared that now the State should consider pedestrian safety to be of paramount importance and treat it as a priority.

Kerala High Court Temporarily Stays Collector's Order Reducing Area Allotted To Trivandrum Government Law College

Case Title: G. Muralidharan v The Principal Secretary and Others

Case No.: WP(C) 20620/2024

The Kerala High Court has temporarily stayed an order by the Trivandrum Collector directing the reconstruction of the outer wall of Trivandrum Government Law College after leaving 2 meters of space for road widening.

A petition challenging the same was filed by Advocate G. Muralidharan who is the Vice President of the Parent Teachers' Association of the College and also a former student and Dr. Sandhya K. Nair who is an Executive Committee Member of the college and also a former student.

The petition noted that the collector did not follow the principles of natural justice while passing this order. The College authorities did not get a chance to raise objections before the collector passed this order, it is argued.

Kerala High Court Forms Expert Committee To Curb Pollution In Periyar River

Case Title: Association of Green Action Force v Union of India & Connected Cases

Case Number: W. P. (C) Nos. 9534 of 2020, 996 of 2012 & 31236 of 2023

The Kerala High Court has formed an Expert Committee to submit a report containing suggestions and actions to be taken to curb pollution in the Periyar River. The committee shall consist of the Secretary, Directorate of Environment and Climate Change, Government of Kerala, the Regional Director, Central Pollution Control Board, Regional Directorate, Bangalore and the Chairman, Kerala State Pollution Control Board.

The Court passed the above order in petitions filed by activist KSR Menon, Periyar Malineekarana Virudha Samidhi, Association of Green Action Force to curb the pollution of the Periyar River. It was alleged that the river is polluted due to the discharge of toxic effluents from industries and Aluva market.

Kerala High Court Directs Govt To Build E-Toilets For Flood-Affected Tribal Families In Nilambur

Case Title: Aryadan Shouketh & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Case Number: WP(C) NO. 24828 OF 2023

The Kerala High Court has directed the state authorities to build an appropriate number of e-toilets for around 300 families living in the area. A report in this regard shall also be filed before the Court.

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice A. J. Desai and Justice V. G. Arun passed this order in a plea filed by Aryadan Shouketh, former Chairperson of Nilambur Municipality and a social worker residing in Vaniyampuzha colony in Pothugal Grama Panchayat alleging grave human rights violation and injustice faced by the tribal communities in Pothugal, Vazhikadavu, and Karulai villages in Nilambur Taluk.

Consider Substantial Increase In Entry Fee To Eco-Tourism Centres To Reduce Number Of Visitors: Kerala High Court To Govt

Case Title: In Re: Bruno v Union of India and Others

Case Number: WP (C ) 13204/ 2021

The Kerala High Court has asked the State government to consider making a "substantial increase" in the entry fee to eco-tourism areas.

The development comes after the Additional Advocate General for the State informed the High Court that its earlier order of closing down eco-tourism centers in Wayand is causing great prejudice.

The High Court had ordered temporary closure of the eco-tourism centre in the district after an elephant killed Vellachallil Paul, an eco-tourism employee in Kuruvadweep.

The Court has now asked the State government to submit a proposal detailing the restrictions/ conditions it intends to impose.

'Govt Not Expected To Intervene In Administration Of Co-op Societies': Plea In Kerala HC Challenges Provisions Of Kerala Co-operative Society Amendment Act 2023

Case Title: Babu K Korah & Another v State of Kerala & Others

Case Number: WPC 21368/2024

A writ petition is moved before the Kerala High Court challenging various provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Society Amendment Act, 2023. The Amendment Act was notified and published in the Kerala Gazette on June 07, 2024.

The plea has been filed challenging sections 14AA, 28(2A), 32 (4), 33, 34A, 56, 57E and 64 alleging that the amendments would cause governmental interference in the day-to-day working of the co-operative societies. It is alleged that there is no rational nexus to be achieved through the amendments and is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.

It is stated that governmental interference in day to day working of co-operative institutions would affect their autonomy and internal democracy. The plea stated that the Constitutional (Ninety-Seventh) Amendment Act, 2011 by inserting 'Part IX B- The Co-operative Societies' was introduced in the Constitution to strengthen their autonomy and contribution to the State. The plea provides that Article 43 B of the Constitution guarantees that the State shall promote the functioning and autonomy of cooperative societies.

Whether Income Tax Department Can Seek Custody Of Seized Currency From Magistrate: Kerala High Court Refers To Division Bench

Case Titile: Ankush and Another v Income Tax Department and Another

Case Number: Crl.M.C. 1742/ 2024, Crl. M.C. 2495/2024, Crl.M.C. No. 2516/2024 & Crl.M.C. 7060

Considering the divergent views of two Single Judge Benches of the Kerala High Court on whether the Income Tax Department has a right to seek interim custody of seized currency notes from the Magistrate, a Single Bench presided by Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas referred the matter to be considered by a Division Bench.

The Court will also have to decide whether a requisition issued under Section 132 A of the Income Tax Act enables the officer to seek interim custody of the currency notes from the court.

The Court directed the Registry to place the case before the Chief Justice for appropriate orders for constituting the Division Bench.

Kerala High Court Directs State To Constitute Special Team And Inquire Revenue Officials For Allegedly Forging Title Deeds

Case Title: One Earth One Life v State of Kerala

Case Number: WP(C) NO. 1801 OF 2010 & Connected Cases

The Kerala High Court recently directed the State Government to constitute a Special Team to inquire into forging of title deeds, including taking bribes by revenue officials in Munnar and Idukki districts.

Last month, the Court sought instructions on whether any inquiry was conducted and action was taken against Devikulam Former Deputy Tahsildar M I Raveendran for issuing bogus title deeds.

The Court found that 42 cases of forging patta were pending in different Courts in the Idukki district, out of which in 18 cases allegations were regarding forging patta to obtain government lands. It stated that bogus title deeds were made for this purpose and public officials were involved.

'Judgments Of Retired Judges Not To Be Uploaded 3 Days After Their Retirement' : Kerala High Court Chief Justice Issues Guidelines

Chief Justice A J Desai of the Kerala High Court has issued guidelines to be followed by judges regarding the signing and uploading of orders/judgments and the use of Chambers and Staff on their Retirement/Transfer/Elevation.

The guidelines contain issue related to use of chambers, uploading of judgment and retaining personal staff.