Kerala High Court Monthly Digest: March 2024 [Citations: 146-210]

Ahammedkutty Bran v Sukumaran 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 146 

B. v State of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 147 

Manuja Mythri v Advocate T K Ajan 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 148 

Dr.Navaneeth K.Unni v State Represented By Public Prosecutor 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 149 

State of Kerala v. Kuniyil Shanoob and ors 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 150 

Manoj v. State of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 151

Firos C.A. Versus State Of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 152 

Johny Padikala V P C Hassan 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 153 

Binoy Kodiyeri v. The Assistant Commissioner 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 154 

Vaisakh v State of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 155

Bipin Sunny v State of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 156

Shameera S v Secretary To Government 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 157

The Commissioner V Nithya R Warriar 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 158 

T M Irshad v State of Kerala & Connected Case 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 159 

Darsana v Sunil 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 160 

Ashish AS v. Union of India and ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 161 

Khalid v State of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 162 

Greeshma Viji v. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kottayam 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 163 

Jayakumar and ors. v. Union of India 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 164

Isahack v. Mini and ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 165 

Sreejith M B V State of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 166 

Gokul Raj v State of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 167 

Sebastian Jacob v The Transport Commissioner 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 168 

Shamnad N and ors. v. The Corporation of Thrissur Through Secretary and anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 169 

Dr. M. Ganeshkumar v. State of Kerala and ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 170 

Mary Mohan Chacko v. Inspector General 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 171

Satheeshkumar @ Kari Satheesh v CBI 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 172

P V Nandakumar v State of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 173 

NATAK v State of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 174 

Stephen v. State of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 175 

Ajmal K V v Union Bank of India & Connected Case 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 176 

Rahiya v. Jasna and ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 177 

Suhaib @ Kullappi Kakka v. State of Kerala and ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 178 

Dr.Ruwise E.A V The Principal Govt. Medical College 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 179 

Navas PK v. State of Kerala and ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 180 

XXX v. XXX 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 181 

Santhosh @ Chandu v State 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 182

Sudha V Mohan v The Authorized Officer, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 184

Jomet and ors. v. State of Kerala and anr., 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 185

Dr. Laxmy Rajmohan and ors. v. State of Kerala and ors., 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 186

Anilkumar V State Of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 187

N Prakash v P Jayarajan and Anr., 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 188 

Gware Margret Sebina v Union Of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 189

XXX v Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 190

The Principal & Others v Dr. Ruwise E A & Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 191

MD. Kamirul Islam v CBI, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 192

Vineeth V V v Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd., 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 193

Case Title: Muhammed C K Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 194 

Rajachandrasekharan @ Babu v. State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 195 

Dr. Radhika Kapahtia v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 196

Rajesh v. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Fort Kochi and ors, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 197

PG Manu v. State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 198

Renjith Kumar V K v State Of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 199

YYY v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 200

K Venugopal Nair v Manager, Canara Bank 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 201 

Dr Abdul Rasheed V State of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 202

University of Calicut v Ameen Rashid K P 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 203 

Dr. MV Narayanan v. The Chancellor, Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit and ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 204

Sheeba C K v State of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 205

Binu @ Kari Binu V State of Kerala & Connected Cases 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 206

Rajini and anr. v. Seetha and ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 207

P Sreenivasan v Babu Raj & Connected Case 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 208

Vimalakumari M K v State of Kerala 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 209

Rkec Projects Limited Vs The Cochin Port Trust, The Office Of Chief Engineer And Another. 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 210

Judgements/orders this month

Kerala High Court Upholds Conviction Of Vicar For Minor's Rape, Reduces Life Term To 20 Yrs Rigorous Imprisonment Without Remission

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 145 

Case title: Fr Edwin Pigarez V State Of Kerala 

The Kerala High Court has upheld the conviction of a vicar for rape and sexual assault of a minor girl in his parish but has reduced the sentence imposed upon him by the Special Court from life imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life to rigorous imprisonment of twenty years without remission. 

“No doubt, rape is a crime which has a severe effect on women and the society...It is an infringement of a person's right to live a dignified life. At the same time, the court cannot ignore the basic principle of sentencing viz, that the sentence imposed should never exceed that which can be justified as appropriate or proportionate to the gravity of the crime considered in the light of its objective circumstances...we deem it appropriate to modify the sentence imposed on the first accused for the offence of rape, to rigorous imprisonment for a period of 20 years, instead of imprisonment for the remainder of the natural life imposed by the Special Court”, stated the Division Bench comprising Justice P B Suresh Kumar and Justice Johnson John.

[S.55 (6)(b) TP Act] When Both Buyer & Seller Not Eager To Perform Agreement, Buyer Entitled To Charge Over Property Due To Consideration Paid: Kerala HC

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 146

Case title: Ahammedkutty Bran v Sukumaran

The Kerala High Court has recently decided a question on whether a buyer is entitled to a charged decree on the plaint schedule property under Section 55(6)(b) of the Transfer of Property Act when both the plaintiff (buyer) and defendant (seller) have failed to perform the agreement for the sale of a property after the buyer already paying advance sale consideration.

Section 55 of the TP Act describes the rights and liabilities of the buyer and seller. The charge was provided under Section 55(6)(b) which reads: “The buyer is entitled— unless he has improperly declined to accept delivery of the property, to a charge on the property, as against the seller and all persons claiming under him, to the extent of the seller's interest in the property, for the amount of any purchase- money properly paid by the buyer in anticipation of the delivery and for interest on such amount; and, when he properly declines to accept the delivery, also for the earnest (if any) and for the costs (if any) awarded to him of a suit to compel specific performance of the contract or to obtain a decree for its rescission.”

Kerala High Court Upholds Step-Father's Conviction For Rape Of Minor Daughter, Says Trial Court Ought To Have Awarded Compensation U/S 357A CrPC

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 147

Case title: B. v State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court has upheld the punishment imposed by the Special Court on a stepfather for brutally raping his minor daughter and later threatening and intimidating her by attempting to pour acid in her mouth.

It stated that the minor girl who belonged to a socially and economically backward tribal community who was raped by her stepfather should be adequately compensated under the Kerala Victim Compensation Scheme. The Court thus directed the Kerala Legal Services Authority (KeLSA) to pay an amount of rupees five lakh as compensation to the minor victim. 

The Division Bench comprising Justice A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Kauser Edappagath while upholding the punishment imposed by the Special Court stated thus:

Reprieve To Journalist, Kerala HC Directs Magistrate To Consider Afresh Summoning Order Passed Without 'Applying Mind', Says It Affects Dignity

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 148

Case title: Manuja Mythri v Advocate T K Ajan

Justice Sophy Thomas while setting aside the summons stated that criminal courts have to be careful in taking cognizance and issuing summons since criminal proceedings could be used as a weapon of harassment or retaliation.

“Taking cognizance and issuing summons to a person as accused in a criminal case is a serious matter affecting his dignity, self respect and image in the society. So, criminal courts have to be careful while taking cognizance and issuing summons to an accused, as we often see criminal proceedings are being resorted to as a weapon of harassment or retaliation.”

The respondent, an advocate filed a defamation case against the petitioner under Section 500 of the IPC. The petitioner has thus approached the High Court for quashing the proceedings before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Karunagapally wherein a summons was issued to her under Section 204 CrPC.

[Section 482 CrPC] Accused Should Be Protected From Vexatious Criminal Proceedings: Kerala HC Provides Relief To Homeo Doctor

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 149

Case title: Dr.Navaneeth K.Unni v State Represented By Public Prosecutor

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas stated that inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC have to be used for quashing the complaint to prevent abuse of the process of the Court and to secure the ends of justice. 

“While considering the question whether the power under Section 482 should be exercised or not, the Court must always be guided by the principles laid down in the provision itself i.e, to prevent the abuse of process of the Court or to secure the ends of justice. In the instant case, this Court is satisfied that both those parameters are satisfied. The complaint is required to be quashed to prevent the abuse of process of Court and also to secure the ends of justice.”

The Court reached the above conclusion relying upon the decision in Priyanka Mishra v. State of Kerala (2023), wherein it was held that “accused should be protected against vexations and unwanted criminal prosecution and from unnecessarily being put through the rigours of an eventual trial.”

Kerala High Court Acquits Accused In CPM Leader P Jayarajan's Attempt To Murder Case, Commutes Sentence Of Only Convict

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 150

Case Title: State of Kerala v. Kuniyil Shanoob and ors

The Kerala High Court has acquitted all but one accused in CPM leader P Jayarajan's attempt to murder case. While the court did find the second accused to be guilty, the sentence was commuted.

A single judge bench of Justice P. Somarajan heard the matter. 

"There is failure on the part of the prosecution to show and prove the involvement of accused No.1 and 3 to 9 in the alleged commission of offense,” stated the court while ordering the acquittal. 

It observed that the recovery of the alleged weapon used in the commission of offense would not give any corroboration as to the involvement of accused No.1 and 3 to 9 simply on the reason that recovery was effected through accused No.2 and not through any other accused.

Non-Explanation Regarding Nonproduction Of Remaining Contraband After Drawing Sample Creates Doubt On Prosecution Case: Kerala HC

Citation Number: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 151

Case Title: Manoj v. State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court allowed an appeal challenging conviction under Section 20 of the Narcotic and Psychotropic Substances Act, (NDPS Act) for non-compliance with Section 52 of the Act, which requires police officers to certify the inventory of the seized substances by a magistrate.

A single judge bench of Justice K Babu remarked that “the intention of the legislature by incorporating Section 52A in the NDPS Act is to see that the process of drawing the sample has to be in the presence and under the supervision of the Magistrate, and the entire exercise has to be certified by him to be correct”.

Kerala VAT Act Empowers Taxing Authorities To Recover Tax Dues From Directors Of Private Company: Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 152

Case Title: Firos C.A. Versus State Of Kerala

The Kerala High Court has held that Section 39 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, empowers the taxing authorities to recover the tax dues from the directors of the private company if the company fails to make payment of the tax.

The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh has observed that when the taxing authorities could not recover the dues from the company, they issued notice for recovery of the said tax dues against the petitioners, who are the directors.

Owner Of Premises Cannot Be Made Liable For Third Party Damages Due To Conduct Of Business Of Tenant: Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 153

Case title: Johny Padikala V P C Hassan

Justice Sathish Ninan stated that the owner could at best be expected to oversee that the business was conducted by the tenant in accordance with the licence deed but could not be made liable for damages to a third party. 

“The owner of the premises could not be made liable for any damage that occurred to a third party consequent on the conduct of the business by the occupier of the premises-the second defendant. However, the position would have been different if the entrustment was for the conduct of a business which is not permitted under law.”

The first defendant (owner) is the appellant who was the owner of a building containing shop rooms. He had let out his shop room to the second defendant (tenant) for storing explosive substances.

Kerala High Court Directs Binoy Kodiyeri To File Income Tax Returns For Assessment Years 2015-22

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 154

Case Title: Binoy Kodiyeri v. The Assistant Commissioner

The Kerala High Court has disposed of the petition filed by Binoy Kodiyeri challenging the assessment orders issued to him by the Income Tax Department for a total of 7 assessment years from 2015-16 to 2021-22. 

Binoy Kodiyeri, son of CPM politician Kodiyeri Balakrishnan, had moved a plea before the High Court alleging that the procedure adopted by the IT Department in issuing certain notices to him was illegal. He claimed the notices were issued in violation of Section 153C of the Income Tax Act which provides for the re-opening of assessments for only six preceding years.

[NDPS Act] Must Follow Procedure For Drawing, Storing, Testing & Disposal Of Samples: Kerala HC Grants Bail For Procedural Lapse By Detecting Officer

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 155

Case title: Vaisakh v State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court has allowed the bail application of an accused whose crime was registered for allegedly possessing narcotics and psychotropic substances in commercial quantity.

In the facts of the case, the police officer searched and seized contraband in from two different zip lock bags from the petitioner and pillion rider, and without drawing a representative sample from both the covers, the contraband was mixed and put in a single cover without the permission of a Magistrate.

Justice C S Dias found that it was mandatory to follow the procedure laid down for drawal, storage, testing and disposal of samples seized as per Section 52 A (procedure for disposal of seized narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances) of the NDPS Act and Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (seizure, storage, sampling and disposal) Rules, 2022.

Abuse Of Process: Kerala HC Dismisses Third Anticipatory Bail Application, Warns Of Costs & Directs Accused To Surrender

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 156

Case title: Bipin Sunny v State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court has warned the imposition of cost to a person who approached the Court for a third time with an anticipatory bail application on the same set of facts.

Justice A Badharudeen stated that the petition was an abuse of the process of the Court and warned of imposition of cost.

“Therefore, the present petition is absolutely an abuse of process of court in the facts of the case discussed and which would deserve dismissal. In fact, imposition of cost also to be considered, but for the time being, I avoid imposition of cost.”

Prison Authorities Can't Withhold Govt Sanctioned Ordinary Leave Granted To Prisoner Citing Conduct, Subsequent Events: Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 157

Case title: Shameera S v Secretary To Government

The Kerala High Court stated that ordinary leave granted to a prisoner under a government order could not be denied or withheld by prison authorities citing subsequent events or conduct of the convict. 

“Therefore, the circumstances till the date of the said recommendation alone are noticed for the grant of leave. The said leave, once granted, by the Government, cannot be interfered with by the Superintendent of Prisons, that too based on a subsequent event. If such orders of the Government are permitted to be interfered with by subordinate officers, chances of misuse and abuse will occur” stated Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas

Can't Be Compelled To Choose Between Motherhood & Employment: Kerala HC Directs State To Adopt Compassionate Approach Towards Transfer Of Single Mothers

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 158

Case title: The Commissioner V Nithya R Warriar

The Kerala High Court has observed that mothers can't be compelled to choose between motherhood and employment. It directed the State to take a compassionate approach towards the transfer of single mothers in order to respect the fundamental rights of the parent as well as of the child.

The Division Bench comprising Justice A. Muhammad Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen observed that the rights of children who were affected by transfers of single parent or mother were dealt insensitively these days. 

“State authorities concerned are bound to deal with the situation in a compassionate manner so as to respect the rights of not only the employee concerned but also that of the child in question in a case like this. If that be so, there may not be any necessity for the court to always urge or admonish the State authorities to behave in a proportionate and reasonable manner in matters affecting fundamental rights and it may be better in the interest of things that the State authorities themselves proactively adopt a compassionate perspective in a case of this nature.”

Stray Dogs Creating Menace, Bonafide Dog Lovers Should Obtain License From Local Authorities To Protect & Keep Them: Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 159

Case title: T M Irshad v State of Kerala & Connected Case

The Kerala High Court has addressed the issue of human-animal conflict in respect of stray dogs. It stated there was a section of people who demanded the killing of stray dogs and another section of people who were fighting to protect the stray dogs.

Justice P.V.Kunhikrishnan stated that bonafide dog lovers, instead of writing in print and visual media should come forward to help the local government institutions to protect them.

The Court stated that bonafide dog lovers could approach the local authorities with applications for obtaining licences to keep stray dogs in tune with the provisions of the Animal Birth Control Rules and Kerala Municipality Act.

Ordering 'Pittance Amount' As Maintenance Violates Child's Right To Decent Living: Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 160

Case title: Darsana v Sunil

The Kerala High Court has stated that ordering 'pittance' by way of maintenance amount violates the right of a child to a decent living. It stated that Courts while ordering maintenance for children should be more cautious to ensure that the amount ordered would be sufficient to meet both ends together. 

Justice P. Somarajan observed that a child cannot be left at the mercy of the father and has a valuable and substantive right to get maintenance which would meet the educational, medical and other expenses.

“Right to get maintenance to a child born in the wedlock from the father is a substantive right, for which, the child cannot be termed as at the mercy of her father. But, it is her valuable right and the father is bound to maintain the child. It should reflect the amount required for the maintenance of the child inclusive of educational expenses, medical expenses and all other expenses connected with the livelihood”, stated the Court.

Kerala High Court Closes Plea Challenging Naming Of Youth Festival As 'Intifada' Upon Being Told Name Has Been Changed

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 161

Case Title: Ashish AS v. Union of India and ors.

The Kerala High Court has closed a plea challenging the naming of a youth college festival to be held in the State as 'Intifiada.'

The plea challenging the naming of the youth festival has been closed in light of the direction of the Vice Chancellor to remove the word 'Intifada' from all banners, posters etc. 

“In light of the above note, the prayers in the writ petition are infructuous” said Justice PV Kunhikrishnan.

Plea Of Alibi Taken By Accused Need Not Be Entertained Till Prosecution Establishes Its Case Satisfactorily: Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 162

Case title: Khalid v State of Kerala

Justice Sophy Thomas stated that a plea of alibi can be used as a shield not as a sword.

“In a plea of alibi, it is the burden of the accused to prove with absolute certainty that the presence of the accused at the scene of crime at the time of occurrence was rather an impossibility. He has to adduce positive evidence to prove the plea of alibi, and that opportunity arises only when prosecution discharges its burden to prove the incident, and the participation of the accused in that incident. Plea of alibi is a defence available for the accused, when prosecution establishes the case against him. Hence it has to be used as a shield, and not as a sword. So a plea of alibi taken by the accused need not be entertained, till prosecution establishes its case satisfactorily. Therefore the plea of alibi cannot be entertained, before prosecution is given an opportunity to establish its case.”

The petitioner was the sole accused and was alleged that he sexually assaulted 11 year old minor girl who was his close relative and was facing charges under Sections 376AB (punishment for rape on woman under twelve years of age), 376(2)(n) (punishment for committing rape repeatedly on same woman) of IPC and under the POCSO Act. He has approached the High Court to quash the final report and proceedings against him on the files of Fast Track Special Court, Pattambi.

Advocate Commissioner Is Not A Job Or Employment, It Is A Privilege Given By Court: Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 163

Case Title: Greeshma Viji v. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kottayam

The Kerala High Court today observed that it ought to be considered an honour to be appointed as an advocate commissioner as opposed to merely being employed for monetary remuneration. 

“Commissioner is not a job, it is not employment, it is a privilege given by the court” observed the court. 

Justice Devan Ramachandran was hearing a plea moved by a lawyer practising in Kottayam whose name had been struck off the list of lawyers who could be appointed as commissioners merely because she asked for her allowance (batta) to be increased.

[Article 12] Unit-Run Canteens Not Controlled Or Financed By Govt Of India, Won't Fall Under Definition Of 'State': Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 164 

Case Title: Jayakumar and ors. v. Union of India

The Kerala High Court has stated that Unit Run Canteens do not come within the definition of 'state' as provided under Article 12 of the Indian Constitution.

“Merely because the Unit Run Canteens works under the Canteen Stores Department (CSD) and the CSD are founded by the consolidated fund of India, it cannot be said that the Unit Run Canteens is directly controlled and financed by the Government of India, they have an independent stand and are working on separate SOPs, issued from time to time” observed Justice Basant Balaji. 

The court was hearing a petition by the employees of a Unit Run Canteen functioning in Pangode Army Headquarters challenging an order to replace these employees with contract workers.

Not Feasible To Expect Documentary Evidence In Family Matters, Court Must Be Prudent: Kerala High Court Reiterates

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 165

Case Title: Isahack v. Mini and ors.

The Kerala High Court has reiterated that it is not feasible to have documentary evidence in a transaction between spouses and in-laws, in a plea challenging the maintainability of a petition before the family court.

A division bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice C Pratheep Kumar observed that “in a transaction between spouses and in-laws, especially when it occurred during the period in which they were in cordial terms and most probably at the time of marriage or immediately before the marriage, usually there will be no documents to prove the same”. 

The petitioner had challenged an original petition filed by his daughter (1st respondent) on the ground that the Family Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the matter. The respondent had filed a plea before the family court to assign the scheduled property in her favor in lieu of the money and gold belonging to her that was entrusted to the petitioner.

Amusement Parks Must Be Established & Operated In Strict Compliance With Law & Safety Requirements: Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 166

Case title: Sreejith M B V State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court directed the Aluva Municipality to provide an undertaking before the Court that the temporary amusement park at Aluva Shivaratri Manappuram shall be established and operated only in strict compliance with the law.

“There can be little doubt that any Amusement Park - be that temporary or permanent - will have to adhere to every requirement in law, particularly safety criteria, because if any mishap is to happen, it would have a cataclysmic effect, especially when it is common knowledge that large number of devotees and others would throng the festival.” stated Justice Devan Ramachandran 

The petitioner has approached the High Court seeking Aluva Municipality to prohibit the operation of a temporary Amusement Park at Aluva Shivaratri Manappuram without required clearances, permissions, and approvals from competent officials.

"Biggest Menace": Kerala High Court Says Time-Bound Case Dispoal Not Taking Place Due To Unnecessary Adjournments Sought By Lawyers

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 167

Case title: Gokul Raj v State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court has considered the extent to which an advocate has the right to seek an adjournment of trial at his or her convenience. Justice A. Badharudeen stated that due to unnecessary adjournment of cases, justice had been denied to real aggrieved persons. It further stated that time-bound disposal of cases was not taking place due to unnecessary adjournments. 

“Even though lawyers are duty bound to co-operate with the Court in the matter of disposal and that is what is intended by co-operation between the Bar and the Bench in letter and spirit, time bound disposal of cases could not be materialized because of unnecessary adjournments. This is the biggest menace and the same is the reason for huge pendency of matters before all courts”, stated the Court.

The Court added that judges were unable to distinguish between genuine requests made by lawyers who were really suffering from illnesses since some lawyers use illness as a ground to seek unnecessary adjournments even after the case was posted for final hearing.

[Motor Vehicles Act] Must Undergo Mandatory Driving Test If Application To Renew License Is Made More Than One Year After Expiry: Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 168

Case title: Sebastian Jacob v The Transport Commissioner

The Kerala High Court stated that a person who wants to renew his driving licence after one year of its expiry has to undergo a mandatory test of competence to drive under Section 15 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

The Court reasoned that the Motor Vehicles Act underwent comprehensive amendments with effect from November 2019, adding that Section 15 (3) was amended to include the test of competency to drive for renewal of a driving licence if it was submitted after one year of expiry of the licence. 

“Indeed there is certain incongruity between Clause (a)(i) to the proviso to Section 9(3) and the 2nd proviso to Section 15(4). But, as far as renewal of Driving Licences is concerned, we have to hold that if application for renewal of Driving Licence is made after one year of the period of previous licence, one has to undergo the test of competence to drive”, stated the Court. 

The Court further stated two reasons for the petitioner to undergo the test of competence to drive. The first reason was that he applied for renewal of his driving license under Section 15 of the Act, so he should satisfy the requirement under proviso to Section 15 (4) which mandates a test of competence to drive after the expiry of one year of previous driving licence. The second reason was that as per the 2019 amendment, the legislature intended to include a test of competence to drive for renewal of the driving licence.

[Thrissur Street Vendors Eviction] Kerala High Courts Directs Thrissur Corporation to Defer From Further Action Till Statutory Committee Consider The Matter

Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 169

Case Title: Shamnad N and ors. v. The Corporation of Thrissur Through Secretary and anr. 

The Kerala High Court has closed a plea challenging an eviction order of the Thrissur Corporation, holding that the petitioners would fall under the definition of 'street vendors' as per Section 2 of the Street Vendors Act 2014 and as such, they are empowered to make an application in writing to the committee constituted under Section 20. 

The court stated that the petitioners may approach the committee constituted in the Thrissur Corporation for the redressal of their grievances.

“There is a specific grievance redressal mechanism under the Act. I will direct you to approach that mechanism, I will grant you some time” said Justice N Nagaresh.

Kerala High Court Strikes Down Nativity Clause In Medical Officers Quota For Admission To Post-Graduate Degrees As Unconstitutional

Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 170 

Case Title: Dr. M. Ganeshkumar v. State of Kerala and ors.

The Kerala High Court has held that a nativity clause which disqualifies non-resident medical officers from applying under the service quota of the Kerala Medical Officers' Admission to Post Graduate Courses Under Service Quota Act is invalid and unconstitutional, adding that the State cannot include any clause in the prospectus that prevents a medical officer under the Act from being considered under any service quota for admission to the Medical Post Graduate Degree Courses based on nativity alone.

“The nativity clause in the instant case discriminates between persons born in the state of Kerala and those born outside the State, and such discrimination falls foul of Article 15(1) of the Constitution” observed the Justice Mohammed Nias. 

[S.83A Registration Act] Registration Authority Can Only Cancel Registered Documents In Cases Of False Impersonation: Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 171

Case title: Mary Mohan Chacko V Inspector General

The Kerala High Court has stated that the Registration Act grants power to the registration authorities to a will to cancel a registered deed only in case of false impersonation.

On analysing Section 83A of the Registration Act, Justice Viju Abraham stated that registered documents could be cancelled by registration authorities only on grounds of false impersonation for executing a will. 

“Going by Section 83A, a registered document could be cancelled by the registration authorities, ie., Inspector General of Registration only on finding that someone has falsely personated another, and in such assumed character presented, admitted the execution and got registered any document by a registering officer and the existence of such a document is detrimental to the interest of another person”, stated the Court

[Paul Muthoot Murder] Kerala High Court Upholds Accused's Conviction & Sentence For Inflicting Stab Injuries & Causing Death

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 172

Case title: SATHEESHKUMAR @ KARI SATHEESH v CBI

The Kerala High Court confirmed the conviction and sentences imposed upon the second accused -Satheeshkumar alias Kari Satheesh in the Paul Muthoot Murder case. The Court upheld his conviction under Section 302 IPC (punishment for murder) on the finding that it was the second accused who inflicted stab injuries causing the death of the deceased.

The second accused approached the High Court challenging his conviction and sentence imposed by the Trial Court. The Trial Court convicted and sentenced the second accused for offences punishable under Sections 144, 148 and 302 of the IPC and Sections 143, 147, 341, 323, 324, 326 and 506 Part II read with Section 149 IPC.

Where No Liability Fixed On Employee, Writ Jurisdiction Can Be Invoked To Seek Interest On Delayed Payment Of Retiral Benefits: Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 173

Case title: P V Nandakumar v State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court has held that an employee can approach the High Court to claim interest on delayed payment of his Retirement benefits in cases where no adverse liability is fixed on him by the employer.

An employee of the Kerala Water Authority had approached the High Court in a writ appeal seeking interest on the delayed payment of his retirement benefits. 

The Division Bench comprising Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice C. Pratheep Kumar stated that the writ petition of the appellant should not have been rejected by directing the appellant to approach other authorities or to file a suit for realisation of interest on delayed payment through a Civil Court.

Creative Discretion & Liberty Has To Be Judged From Impact It Will Have On General Public Perception: Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 174

Case title: NATAK v State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court stated that intolerance was anathema in matters relating to creativity and artistic expression when different persons have different perceptions of creativity. It further stated that creative discretion and liberties will have to be judged from the angle of impact that it will have on the general public.

The petitioner's theatre organisation has approached the Kerala High Court challenging the order of a Sub Divisional Magistrate directing them to alter the name of their drama called as 'Governorum Thoppiyum' on the misunderstanding that it was made as a reference to the Governor of Kerala.

[POCSO Act] Kerala HC Upholds Conviction Of Father Accused Of Sexually Assaulting 9-Yr-Old Daughter, Says Life-Sentence Imposed By Trial Court Not Disproportionate

Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 175 

Case Title: Stephen v. State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court in a recent POCSO matter rejected the appeal of an accused who was convicted for committing aggravated penetrative sexual assault on his nine-year-old daughter. 

The Court also rejected the argument of the accused that the sentence imposed of 5 years under the POCSO Act, and 1 year under the IPC, was disproportionate to the gravity of the offence.

A division bench of Justices PB Suresh Kumar and Johnson John reasoned that the punishment imposed was not disproportionate to the gravity of the offence as the accused was the biological father of the 9-year-old victim.

Auction Purchasers Can't Object To Bank Offering One-Time Settlement Facility To Borrower Until Auction Sale Is Confirmed: Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 176

Case title: Ajmal K V v Union Bank of India & Connected Case

The Kerala High Court has held that auction purchasers cannot say that banks cannot enter into a one-time settlement facility with the borrowers and cancel the auction sale until the sale was conformed in their favour. 

Justice N Nagaresh stated that the auction purchasers do not acquire any right or interest over the mortgaged properties as long as the auction sale was confirmed and sale certificates were issued in their favour. 

"It is true that the right of redemption is available to the borrowers will stand extinguished upon publication of notice of auction. However, that will not prevent the parties to a loan agreement from entering into a One Time Settlement. As long as the sale of the mortgaged assets is not confirmed in favour of the auction purchasers and as long as the Sale Certificates are not issued, the auction purchasers cannot be heard to contend that the Bank should not enter into a One Time Settlement with the borrowers"

[Cheque Dishonour] Complainant Failed To Prove Cheque Was Issued Against Legally Enforceable Debt: Kerala High Court Acquits Accused

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 177 

Case Title: Rahiya v. Jasna and ors.

The Kerala High Court has held that a complainant under the Negotiable Instruments Act cannot rely on the presumption that the holder of a negotiable instrument has paid consideration for it when his claim is inconsistent.

It upheld the acquittal of the accused upon noting that the complainant in the present case had failed to prove that the cheque had been issued in lieu of legally enforceable debt when called upon to do so by the trial court, due to suspicious circumstances surrounding the consideration for the negotiable instrument.

“The accused could discharge her initial onus of proof showing that the existence of consideration was doubtful. The onus now shifted to the complainant, who is obliged to prove it as a matter of fact” observed Justice K Babu.

Any Person Regardless Of Gender & Age Can Be Accused Under POCSO Act: Kerala High Court Refuses To Quash Case Against Minor

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 178 

Case Title: Suhaib @ Kullappi Kakka v. State of Kerala and ors.

The Kerala High Court has held that any person regardless of gender and age can be an accused under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).

It thus refused to quash the proceedings pending under the Act against a minor. The bench of Justice PG Ajithkumar however clarified that the minor cannot be tried in an ordinary criminal court but can only be dealt under the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act.

“'Penetrative sexual assault' and 'sexual assault' and its aggravated forms are defined in Sections 3, 5, 7 and 9 of the PoCSO Act. A reading of those definitions and the corresponding penal provisions indicate that any person irrespective of gender and age can be a person accused of such offences, of course, subject to the general exceptions in the IPC” observed .

Kerala High Court Permits Doctor Accused Of Abetting Girlfriend's Suicide By Asking For Exorbitant Dowry To Re-Join Post Graduate Studies

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 179

Case title: Dr.Ruwise E.A V The Principal Govt. Medical College

The Kerala High Court has permitted Dr Ruwais, who is booked for abetting the suicide of his girlfriend Dr Shahana by backing out of their marriage in demand of exorbitant dowry, to re-join his post-graduate studies.

Ruwais was charged with the offences under Section 306 IPC ('Abetment of Suicide') and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act ('Penalty for demanding dowry'). When the incident came to light, the Indian Medical Association (IMA) suspended Ruwais' medical license. He is currently released on bail.

[KAAPA] Look Out Notice Cannot Be Challenged Without Challenging The Detention Order: Kerala High Court

Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 180 

Case Title: Navas PK v. State of Kerala and ors.

The Kerala High Court recently held that a look out notice under the Kerala Anti-Social Activities Prevention Act, 2007 cannot be challenged without a challenge to the detention order

“We note that a look out notice is a part of consequential proceedings. It cannot be subject to challenge” observed Justice A Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen. 

A look out notice was issued against the petitioner under the Kerala Anti-Social Activities Prevention Act, 2007. The petitioner approached the High Court challenging the notice without challenging the detention order.

Wife Can't Unilaterally Withdraw Consent For Divorce After Settlement Was Arrived At During Mediation: Kerala HC Upholds Dissolution Of Marriage

Case Title: XXX v. XXX

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 181

The Kerala High Court upheld the judgement passed by the Family Court dissolving the marriage between the parties in a joint petition filed for divorce, even though the wife withdrew her consent for filing the divorce.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice C Pratheep Kumar stated that the Family Court dissolved the marriage by relying upon the decision in Benny v. Mini (2021) and the Bombay High Court judgment in Prakash Alumal Kalandari v. Jahnavi Prakash Kalandari (2011). The Court stated that one party cannot unilaterally withdraw from the terms of settlement entered through a mediation agreement after the other party has performed their part of the settlement terms.

Dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant, the Court stated that, 

“Several litigations are pending between the parties before various courts including petition for divorce, custody of child and patrimony. All those cases were settled in mediation and the parties agreed to dissolve their marriage by mutual consent. Accordingly, the parties filed a joint petition for divorce, received part payment, disposed of the pending cases and thereafter at the final stage when the case was taken up for evidence to record the consent of the parties, the appellant withdrew her consent.”

[S.218 CrPC] Irregularity On Account Of Misjoinder Of Charges Doesn't Vitiate Conviction Unless Miscarriage Of Justice Proved: Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 182

Case title: Santhosh @ Chandu v State

The Kerala High Court has upheld a conviction order passed by the Trial Court despite the misjoinder of charges, stating there was no failure of justice.

Justice P G Ajithkumar said no prejudice was caused to the accused and separate evidence was brought before the Court to prove separate charges. It stated that the accused was given ample opportunity to challenge the evidence presented before the Court and there was no failure of justice, despite misjoinder of charges.

“From the nature of evidence let in by the prosecution, which is adverted to above, it is quite clear that separate evidence was brought in concerning each head of the charges. No occasion resulting in miscarriage of justice or prejudice to the appellant is pointed out by the learned Amicus Curiae. On an anxious consideration of the evidence on record, I am convinced that there occurred no failure of justice on account of such a misjoinder of charge. The appellant obtained enough opportunity to challenge the evidence of each witness and there was no overlapping or mixing up of facts. In the circumstances, the conviction of the appellant is quite legal; in spite of such a misjoinder of charges. Hence, I find no reason to interfere with the judgment of conviction.”

The appellant was the sole accused and was convicted and sentenced for offences punishable under Section 324 (voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means), 354 (assault or criminal force to assault modesty of woman) and 448 (punishment for house trespass) of the IPC.

No Break In Service Merely Because Initial Appointment Was Made Against Leave Vacancy Followed By Appointment To Regular Vacancy: Kerala High Court

Case title: The Manager v State of Kerala & Connected Case

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 183

The Kerala High Court stated that there was no break in service merely because the initial appointment was made in leave vacancy followed by an appointment in regular vacancy. 

The dispute in the writ appeal was in connection with the appointment of a teacher (5th respondent) as headmistress in an aided school. 

Justice A Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen dismissed the appeal filed by the Manager of the school and other teachers who were appointed as headmistress stated that the 5th respondent was eligible to be appointed as headmistress since she served without any break for 12 years even though her initial appointment was made in a leave vacancy.

[SARFAESI Act] Kerala High Court Takes Humanitarian Approach, Defers Recovery Proceedings Against Comatose Entrepreneur In Wife's Plea

Case title: Sudha V Mohan v The Authorized Officer

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 184

The Kerala High Court took a humanitarian approach by directing the bank officials to defer coercive proceedings against the petitioner's husband and his assets, who is now in a vegetative state.

The court has also directed the Sub Divisional Magistrate/Revenue Divisional Officer to decide to grant limited guardianship under Section 14 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 to the petitioner-wife for disposing of her husband's property for clearing his liabilities.

Justice N Nagaresh stated that a humanitarian approach has to be taken since the petitioner's husband is now in a comatose state under the care of his wife and children.

Prima Facie Offence Not Attracted: Kerala High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail ToTwo Accused In Kerala University Arts Festival Bribery Scandal

Case Title: Jomet and ors. v. State of Kerala and anr.

Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 185

The Kerala High Court recently allowed the anticipatory bail application of the two accused in the cheating scandal at the Kerala University Arts Festival, stating that prima facie the offences alleged are not attracted against them. 

“On an appreciation of the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar, the materials placed on record and the findings rendered above, this Court is prima facie of the opinion that the offence attributed against the petitioners may not be attracted. Furthermore, I find that the petitioners' custodial interrogation is unnecessary,” observed Justice CS Dias while allowing the bail application.

Kerala High Court Dismisses Plea Challenging Amendment Mandating Gynaecologists As Sole Specialists To Conduct Medical Examination Of Sexual Assault Survivors

Case Title: Dr. Laxmy Rajmohan and ors. v. State of Kerala and ors.

Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 186

The Kerala High Court has dismissed the petition challenging clause 6 of the Kerala Medico-Legal Protocol for Examination of Survivors of Sexual Offences 2019 which mandates that gynaecologists be the sole specialists to conduct medical examination of survivors of sexual offence. 

The court accepted the respondent's arguments and noted that the amendment applies to only one category of sexual assault survivors which is woman/child survivors of vaginal penetrative sexual assault.

"In the case of a woman or a girl, they're trying to give the best possible care" remarked Justice Devan Ramachandran orally.

No Offence Of Criminal Trespass Is Attracted When Accused Enters Property Which Is In His Joint Possession: Kerala High Court

Case title: Anilkumar V State Of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 187

The Kerala High Court stated that a person cannot be convicted for an offence of house trespass if the 'property in question' was under his joint possession. It stated that the entry of the offender into a property which is in his joint possession cannot be termed unlawful and cannot be termed as criminal trespass. 

The Division Bench comprising Justice A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Kauser Edappagath, partly allowed the appeal and acquitted the accused under Section 449 IPC and confirmed his murder conviction.

Judges Can't Be Vilified By Unhealthy Criticism: Kerala HC In Plea Seeking Contempt Action Against CPM's P Jayarajan Over Facebook Post

Case Title: N Prakash v P Jayarajan and Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 188

The Kerala High Court today disposed of a plea filed over allegedly "derogatory" Facebook post made by CPI(M) Leader P Jayarajan in relation to the proceedings emanating from an attack on the leader in 1999.

Upset with the manner in which his case was dealt with by the single judge, Jayarajan purportedly said people should react against such "worms" in the judiciary.

Justice Devan Ramachandran said it is for the Registrar General to take action and a judicial order need not be issued. “There can be little doubt that the Registrar General is vested with certain powers under the Contempt of Courts (High Court of Kerala) Rules, 1971 and this Court feels and finds no reason to believe that he would not exercise it as per law taking note of all relevant and germane aspects. In such perspective, I do not think that this court is to direct the Registrar General to act in a particular manner because it is up to him statutorily to take action as per the legislative scheme. In the afore circumstances, I close this writ petition, however, leaving full liberty to the petitioner to move before the Registrar General appropriately for which purpose all contentions are also left open.” 

Woman Free To Make Personal Choice To Terminate Pregnancy Within Statutory Limits: Kerala High Court Allows Jailed Keynan Woman's Plea

Case title: Gware Margret Sebina v Union Of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 189

The Kerala High Court has permitted a Kenyan woman, who is jailed pending trial in Women's Jail and Correction Home at Viyyur, to undergo medical termination of pregnancy.

Justice Devan Ramachandran relied upon the report submitted by a Medical Board to state that there was no difficulty in allowing medical termination of pregnancy when the pregnancy was only 14 weeks old and within the statutory limits prescribed under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act.

Law Doesn't Require Husband's Consent: Kerala High Court Permits Woman To Terminate Pregnancy During Pending Divorce Proceedings

Case title: XXX v Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 190

The Kerala High Court has held that a woman can claim a 'change of circumstances' for seeking medical termination of pregnancy during pending divorce proceedings.

The bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran reasoned that 'marital status' cannot be construed as merely de jure (a legal construction) in the context of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act and it has to be seen de facto since there may be situations where a woman, though married, may effectively be without any benefits of marriage. 

Suicide Abetment Case: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Interim Order Permitting Dr Ruwais To Re-Join PG Studies, Says College Authorities Not Heard

Case title: The Principal & Others v Dr. Ruwise E A & Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 191

The Kerala High Court today set aside the interim order issued in favour of Dr Ruwais, accused of abetting the suicide of his girlfriend Dr Shahana by backing out of their marriage in demand of exorbitant dowry, which permitted him to re-join his post-graduate studies. 

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice A J Desai and Justice V G Arun set aside the interim order passed by the Single judge because the college authorities were not given sufficient time to produce documents and plead their case before the Court.

Bulk Possession Would Lead To Irresistible Conclusion Of Trafficking Counterfeit Currency Notes Punishable U/S 489B IPC: Kerala High Court

Case title: MD. Kamirul Islam v CBI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 192

The Kerala High Court has held that possession of a bulk quantity of counterfeit currency notes without an explanation would only lead to an irresistible conclusion that the accused had an object of trafficking counterfeit currency notes and not merely using it. 

“The appellants and their companion children were in possession of 139 notes of 1000 rupee and 168 notes of 500 rupee denominations. One among them was proved to have attempted to transact a 1000 rupee counterfeit note. The appellants came to Kerala and stayed in lodges and they are Hindi speaking persons. They did not offer any explanation for the possession of such a quantity of counterfeit currency notes. In such circumstances, the irresistible conclusion is that they carried and possessed the counterfeit currency notes with the object of transacting the same amounting to trafficking of counterfeit currency notes, and not merely possession with intent to use”, stated Justice P G Ajithkumar.

POSH Act | Complaint Not Served On Respondent, Witnesses Examined In His Absence: Kerala High Court Says ICC Must Observe Natural Justice

Case title: Vineeth V V v Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 193

The Kerala High Court recently quashed an inquiry report issued under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act and rules made thereunder against an Assistant Engineer who was working in the Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB), citing violation of principles of natural justice. 

Quashing the inquiry report, Justice Basant Balaji stated thus: “The entire proceedings shall be completed in accordance with law strictly following the principles of natural justice and Rule 7 of the POSH Rules after giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing as well, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.”

Procedure U/S 148A Need Not Be Complied With Before Issuing Reassessment Notices: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Muhammed C K Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 194

The Kerala High Court has held that the procedure contemplated by the provisions of Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, need not be complied with before issuing notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 

The bench of Justice Gopinath P. has observed that when an item or cash, as in this case, is produced before a Criminal Court, then it is not open to the Income Tax Department to issue a notice under Section 132A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Act, to the Court in question. Once the item is produced before the Court in connection with any criminal case registered by the Police or any other law enforcement agency, an application for release of the same or for giving custody of the same to the Income Tax Department can only be in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and specifically Section 451 Cr.P.C. It does not take away from the fact that the department initiated proceedings under Section 132A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to requisition the amount from the station house officer.

Husband Would Know Wife's Caste Identity, Presumption Under Section 8 SC/ST Act Applies: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Rajachandrasekharan @ Babu v. State of Kerala

Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 195

The Kerala High Court has held that the presumption under Section 8 of the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act regarding knowledge of accused about victim's caste or tribal identity is applicable, if the victim is the wife of the accused.

Section 8(c) says there is a presumption that the accused would be aware of the victim's caste or tribal identity if they were previously acquainted with the victim. “The victim herein is none other than the wife of the appellant...Hence, the presumption under Section 8 could very well be drawn” observed Justice AK Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Kauser Edappagath. 

S.306 IPC | Ordinary Quarrels In Marriage Can't Constitute Abetment Of Suicide In Absence Of Something More In Form Of 'Instigation': Kerala HC

Case name: Dr. Radhika Kapahtia v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 196

The Kerala High Court has held that ordinary quarrels in marital life without any overt act or instigation that would stimulate or prod the deceased to commit suicide would not attract an offence of abetment to suicide under Section 306 of the IPC.

Quashing the criminal proceedings against the wife, Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas stated that other than ordinary quarrels between the spouses, there was no instigation by the wife to commit suicide. 

Refusal To Remove Mortal Remains From Stranger's Property Akin To Abandonment Of Body, Kerala Rules On Burial Of Unclaimed Corpses Can Be Invoked: High Court

Case Title: Rajesh v. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Fort Kochi and ors

Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 197

The Kerala High Court has stated that a burial in a stranger's property without their express consent can be construed as an abandonment of that body and thereby, the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Burial of Unclaimed Corpses and Carcasses) Rules, 1996 can be invoked in such cases. 

“In my opinion, by his refusal to remove the corpse even after it becoming evident that the body was buried in a stranger's property, the son had virtually abandoned the body of his mother, making it akin to an unclaimed corpse” observed Justice V G Arun

Kerala High Court Grants Bail To Former Government Pleader In Sexual Assault Case

Case Name: PG Manu v. State of Kerala

Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 198

The Kerala High Court on Friday granted bail to PG Manu, a former senior government pleader who practiced before the High Court and who was arrested on allegations of subjecting a client to rape. 

However, Justice Sophy Thomas pointed to the seriousness of the offence alleged and observed, "The fact that the petitioner was a senior government pleader of this Court and that he sexually exploited a hapless lady who approached him to settle a case which was registered at her instance is a serious hing to be taken note of. The petitioner who was in a position to dominate the will of the victim sexually exploited her and committed rape and sent obscene videos to her continuously.” 

Criminal Courts Not Recovery Courts, Quantum Of Bond Can't Depend On Amount Involved In Criminal Cases: Kerala High Court

Case title: Renjith Kumar V K v State Of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 199

The Kerala High Court stated that the right to be enlarged on bail is an indefeasible part of the right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution and cannot be denied by imposing stringent or unreasonable conditions. 

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas stated that excessive bond amounts cannot be imposed for denying bail since bail bonds only intend to secure the presence of the accused before the court. It stated that the amount fixed in bail bonds does not determine the sufficiency of surety and does not depend on the amount involved in criminal cases.

Merely Because Trial Court Failed To Frame Charges In Stipulated Time Doesn't Entitle Accused To Bail Considering Nature & Gravity Of Offence: Kerala HC

Case title: YYY v State of Kerala 

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 200

The Kerala High Court stated that an accused was not entitled to bail merely because the Trial Court failed to frame charges within a stipulated time. In the facts of the case, the High Court had dismissed the earlier bail application of the accused with a direction to the Trial Court to frame charges within one month and to dispose of the case within six months thereafter.

Justice Sophy Thomas stated that the accused was not entitled to bail since there were concurrent findings against him. It stated that the accused will have to face the trial as an under-trial prisoner due to the nature and gravity of the alleged offences against him.

CIBIL Rating Not Changed Despite Clearing Loan : Kerala High Court Directs Credit Rating Agency To Ensure Requisite Credit Rating

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 201 

Case title: K Venugopal Nair v Manager, Canara Bank

The Kerala High Court directed the Trans Union CIBIL Ltd, a credit rating agency, to ensure that the requisite Credit Rating was given to the petitioner since he had no subsisting loans and the earlier loan account had been fully closed.

The petitioner approached the High Court to restore his Credit Rating despite no subsisting loans pending. His Credit Rating remained very low despite no subsisting loans. 

Justice Devan Ramachandran has directed Trans Union Cibil Limited to consider the reports submitted by the Canara Bank regarding the closure of the loan account and to take a decision on the Credit Rating of the petitioner within three weeks. Further, the Court directed the Trans Union Cibil Limited to ensure the petitioner was given sufficient Credit Rating.

“The third respondent will ensure that the requisite “Credit Rating” is given to the petitioner and reflected in the online portal within the afore time frames", said the Court.

Vigilance Manual Not Statute, Mere Non-Compliance With Directions For Investigators Doesn't Vitiate Probe: Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 202

Case title: Dr Abdul Rasheed V State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court has observed that the Vigilance Manual is not a statute and was not enacted by the legislature. Thus, it held that mere non-compliance with the Vigilance Manual's directions for investigating officers would not vitiate an investigation.

The petitioner was an Assistant Surgeon at Kerala Health Services and was alleged to have committed an offence of criminal misconduct by a public servant under the Prevention of Corruption Act. He alleged that the investigation was conducted by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) without complying with the directions of the Vigilance Manual. 

Justice K Babu stated that there was no prejudice caused to the petitioner due to non-compliance with Vigilance Manual directions.

University Can't Assume Role Of College Principal For Cancelling Student's Admission Due To Lack Of Attendance: Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 203

Case title: University of Calicut v Ameen Rashid K P

The Kerala High Court stated that a University cannot assume the role of the College Principal to cancel a student's admission on the allegation of lack of attendance. It stated that the role of the university was only supervisory. 

The Division Bench comprising Justice A Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen observed thus: 

“As observed earlier, the University's role in private College is to the limited extent to ensure that University regulations are followed or not. The University cannot assume the role of Principal and direct the College Principal to act on their direction. Absolutely there is no merit in this writ appeal.”

Kerala High Court Dismisses Plea By Former VC Of Sree Sankaracharya University Of Sanskrit Challenging His Removal By The Chancellor

Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 204

Case Title: Dr. MV Narayanan v. The Chancellor, Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit and ors.

The Kerala High Court has dismissed the appeal of Dr. M. V. Narayanan, Vice Chancellor of Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit against an order of the single judge bench refusing to vacate the order passed by the Chancellor of the university removing the appellant as Vice Chancellor.

A division bench of Justices AK Jayasankaran Nambiar and Kauser Edappagathstated that “we are of the view that the impugned order of the learned Single Judge insofar as it is adverse to the appellant herein does not warrant any interference”. 

A single judge bench of Justice Mohammed Nias CP had previously refused to grant a stay of operation, reasoning that as only one name had been forwarded by the selection committee, it is not only in violation of 7.3 of UGC Regulations, 2018 but also the ratio established in Rajasree's case.

Child Facing Prejudice Due To Being Member Of SC Community Can't Be Denied Community Certificate Merely Because Parents Had Inter-Religious Marriage: Kerala HC

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 205

Case title: Sheeba C K v State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court has stated that a Scheduled Caste Community Certificate cannot be denied to a child born out of an inter-religious marriage merely because her father was a Christian and did not convert to the Hindu Community.

The mother of the child belonged to the Pulaya community and approached the High Court against the non-issuance of a community certificate to her minor daughter for educational purposes. 

Justice Devan Ramachandran stated that the indignities humilities and the social handicaps faced by a member of a particular community should be the determinative factor to grant or refuse the caste certificate of that community.

[Sunil Babu Gang Rivalry Murder] Kerala High Court Upholds Life Sentence Of Four Accused For Murder, Acquits Other Accused

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 206

Case title: Binu @ Kari Binu V State of Kerala & Connected Cases

The Kerala High Court upheld rigorous life imprisonment imposed upon four accuseds 1 to 4 (Sijith alias Rajan, Arun alias Gabri, Vineeth alias Picha, Arun Mali alias Aneesh) for the offence of murder of CITU worker Sunil Babu due to gang rivalry.

The Court also set aside the conviction of rigorous life imprisonment imposed upon accuseds 5 to 8 (Binu alias Kari Binu, Saju alias Kallan Saju, Saji alias Pori Saji, Suresh alias Kopra Suresh) for criminal conspiracy to murder due to lack of evidence. 

The accused persons allegedly murdered the deceased Sunil Babu on December 13, 2015, due to gang rivalry. 

The Division Bench comprising Justice P B Suresh Kumar and Justice Johnson John set while upholding the conviction against accuseds 1 to 4 and setting aside the conviction against accused 5 to 8 stated thus: 

“Therefore, while confirming the conviction and sentence imposed against accused Nos. 1 to 4 for the offences punishable under Sections 341 and 302 r/w Section 34 IPC, the conviction and sentence passed against them for the offences under Sections 120B and 326 IPC are set aside. The conviction and sentence passed against accused Nos. 5 to 8 under Section 120B IPC is also set aside and they are acquitted under Section 235(1) Cr.P.C. They shall be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other cases.”

[Suit For Partition] Final Decree Court Can Deal With Excess Land Found In Possession Of Parties Along With Extent Covered In Title Deed: Kerala HC

Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 207

Case Title: Rajini and anr. v. Seetha and ors.

The Kerala High Court has stated that the final decree court in a suit for partition, has the jurisdiction to deal with the excess extent of land found in possession of parties, along with the extent specified in their title deed.

A single judge bench of Justice C Jayachandran clarified that “it is well-nigh within the powers of the final decree court to deal with the excess extent of land found in the possession of the parties, along with the extent covered by their title deed”.

S.148 NI Act | Appellate Court Has Discretion To Waive Or Order Deposit Of Minimum 20% Fine But It Must Give Reasons: Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 208

Case title: P Sreenivasan v Babu Raj & Connected Case

The Kerala High Court has held that the Appellate Court has the statutory discretion to either order a deposit or waive the deposit of the fine or compensation amount under Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Court clarified that since the Appellate Court would be exercising statutory discretion, it would be legally obliged to give reasons for either ordering a deposit or waiving the deposit of fine or compensation amount.

While hearing an appeal against conviction for cheque dishonour under Section 138, the Appellate Court may under Section 148 direct the appellant to deposit a minimum of 20% of the compensation or fine amount as awarded by the Trial Court.

Pension Is Employee's Savings, Can Only Be Denied In Cases Of Fraud & Not Due To Pending Litigation Regarding Caste Status: Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 209

Case title: Vimalakumari M K v State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court directed the disbursal of pensionary benefits to a woman who retired in 2013, stating that she had not committed any fraud even though issues regarding her caste status were pending before the Court.

The Division Bench comprising Justice A.Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen stated that the pension cannot be denied to the petitioner due to the delay on the part of the State in conducting an inquiry to ascertain whether she belonged to the Moger community or not. 

“Pension is a savings of an employee, that can be deprived only in accordance with the procedure established by law or when it is shown that the employment itself has obtained by playing fraud. In the light of the factual situation as above, we cannot hold that any fraud has been committed by the petitioner, though her status as a member of moger community, is set to be retained by this Court.”

Court Empowered To Extend Time For Passing Arbitral Award Even If It Is Already Passed: Kerala High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 210

Case Title: Rkec Projects Limited Vs The Cochin Port Trust, The Office Of Chief Engineer And Another.

The matter pertained to an arbitral award for which the time allotted lapsed on 28.2.2022. However, the award was not rendered until 6.5.2023, without any formal extension of the tribunal's mandate.

The High Court held that the termination of the arbitrator's mandate does not strip the Court of its authority to consider applications for extension under Section 29A(3) and (4). Rather, the termination is contingent upon the Court's power to extend the mandate, as provided by the Arbitration Act. The High Court held that it has jurisdiction to extend the time for passing the award even after its issuance, provided there exist sufficient grounds for such an extension.

The High Court found that the circumstances surrounding the COVID period, as stated in the interlocutory applications, constituted sufficient cause to justify an extension of the time for passing the award until 6.5.2023. Thus, the High Court affirmed its authority to intervene and extend the time limit even after the issuance of the award.

Other developments this month

"Historically Linked With Militant Groups": Plea In Kerala High Court Challenges Naming Of Youth Festival As 'Intifada'

Case Title: Ashish AS v. Union of India and ors. 

Case Number: WP(C) 8526 of 2023

A plea has been moved beofre the Kerala High CO challenging the naming of a youth festival, 'Intifada' being conducted at NSS College, Nilamel.

The petitioner, a first-year student at the NSS College, Nilamel submitted that naming the youth festival 'Intifada', an Arabic word which translates to 'shake off' cannot be used as it has been “historically linked with the militant/ terror groups like the Hamas of Palestine”.

“There is no place for politics or geopolitics in a youth festival. Israel-Palestine conflict cannot be the point of discussion or the theme of creative expression” states the plea.

Woman Brings Life To Earth, Feeling That Girl Child Is Less Than Boy Child Must Stop: Kerala High Court Observes

Case title: A v Union Of India

Case number: WP(C) 6695/2024

The Kerala High Court today orally observed that it is horrendously immoral to demand a woman to give birth only to a boy child and not a girl child.

The Court was hearing a plea moved by a woman alleging that she was handed over a note by her husband and his family on the first day of her marriage itself, containing instructions on how to conceive a male child. She seeks investigation and action against them under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, of 1994.

Justice Devan Ramachandran orally observed, “This thing should stop, it has to stop. This feeling that girl child is lesser than boy child should stop…It is woman who bring life to the Earth.”

"Street Vendors Act A Welfare Legislation": Plea In Kerala High Court By Street Vendors Challenges Thrissur Corporation's Eviction Order

Case Number: WP(C) No. 8349 of 2024

Case Title: Shamnad N and ors. v. The Corporation of Thrissur Through Secretary and anr.

A plea has been filed at the Kerala High Court challenging a notice issued by the Thrissur Corporation directing the eviction of street vendors engaged in selling second-hand books. 

The writ petition was filed by a group of street vendors, who have been engaged in selling second-hand books in the streets of Thrissur City, mainly Palace Road, for more than 30 years. 

“The present notice is a gross violation of the Act and the Rules framed for the protection of the street vendors, which is a welfare legislation introduced for the betterment of the livelihood of the street vendors and to prevent harassment and illegal evictions by statutory bodies across the state” states the plea.

Kerala High Court Seeks Advocates Association's Opinion On Suggestion To Curtail Court Vacations By Judges Taking Turns To Go On Leave

In a Full Court meeting held on January 30, 2024, the Kerala High Court has decided to obtain suggestions from the Kerala High Court Advocates' Association regarding vacations in the High Court and Supreme Court. 

The Ministry of Law and Justice had forwarded recommendations of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on 'Judicial Processes and their Reform' regarding vacations in the Supreme Court and High Court for consideration of the High Court. 

The 133rd Report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee had endorsed the suggestion of former Chief Justice R M Lodha that instead of all Judges going on vacations at the same time, individual Judges should take leave at different times through the year. This would ensure that the Courts are constantly open and always available to hear cases.

Plea In Kerala HC By Village Resident Challenges "Derogatory & Incorrect" Portrayal Of Events In Dileep-Starrer Movie 'Thankamani'

Case Number: WP(C) No. 8866 of 2024

Case Title: Biju VR @ Biju Vaishyanparambil v. Central Board of Film Certification and ors.

A resident of the Thankamani village in Idukki district has moved the Kerala High Court seeking to quash the certificate issued to the film 'Thankamani the Bleeding Village' by the Central Board of Film Certification.

The petitioner submits that the title is defamatory and alleges the occurrence of events that never happened in the village, and as such, is against Section 5(b) of the Cinematograph Act.

Kerala High Court Confers Senior Designation On Twenty Advocates

The Chief Justice of Kerala High Court, A J Desai and Judges of the Kerala High Court have conferred Senior Designation on twenty advocates. The notification came following a Full Court meeting held on March 06, 2024.

[Masala Bonds Case] Kerala High Court Seeks Explanation From ED On Fresh Summons Issued To Fmr Finance Minister Dr Thomas Isaac

Case title: Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board V Director, Thomas Issac v Deputy Director

Case number: WPC 1377/2024 & WPC 3719/2024

Justice Devan Ramachandran stated that the ED shall submit an explanation before the Court explaining the reasons behind issuing the new summons to Dr Issac. 

“…Obviously, the ED must inform why Ext P19 has been issued though I make it clear that its validity may or may not be considered by this Court in this writ petition depending upon the contentions to be taken by the parties at the relevant time.”

The Court made this observation in a plea filed by the KIIFB challenging the summons issued by ED in connection with the masala bonds case. A separate plea was also filed by former Finance Minister Dr Thomas Isaacchallenging the summons by the ED stating that he was only an individual and no specific allegations were made against him in the summons for taking oral evidence.

Kerala High Court Judges To Visit Brahmapuram Site Today To Evaluate Progress Of Bio Mining And Other General Conditions

Case title: Suo moto v. State of Kerala

Case number: WP(C) NO. 7844 OF 2023

Two Kerala High Court judges will today visit the Brahmapuram site to evaluate the progress of bio-mining and other general conditions there. The site was recently in news due to a massive fire incident.

The Special Bench comprising Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas and Justice Gopinath P said it will visit the site today (March 07, 2024) at 3.30 PM to evaluate the progress of works happening at the Brahmapuram site.

“We feel it appropriate to visit the Brahmapuram site to have first-hand knowledge of the progress of bio-mining and the general condition of the site and also to evaluate other issues mentioned in the report of the learned amici curiae. We, therefore, intend to inspect the site at 3.30 p.m., on 7.3.2024. The learned counsel appearing for various parties have agreed that the concerned officials of the Revenue Department, the Fire Force Department and the Kochi Municipal Corporation will be present at the site at 3.30 p.m. on 7.3.2024.”

Former Kasargod College Principal Approaches Kerala High Court For Quashing Disciplinary Proceedings Initiated Against Her

Case title: Dr Rema M v The Director Of Collegiate Education And Others

Case number: OP KAT 109/2024

The Kerala High Court has deferred actions under the disciplinary proceedings initiated against Dr Rema who was the principal of the Government College, Kasargod for allegedly misbehaving with students. She has approached the Court for quashing the entire proceedings initiated against her. 

The Division Bench comprising Justice A.Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen stated thus, "All actions pursuant to disciplinary proceedings are deferred". 

The petitioner, Dr Rema was working as Principal in charge of Government College, Kasargod. She claimed that she took strict action against drug abuse and other anti-social activities taking place in the college. She alleged that persons on the pretext of campus politics entered the college campus for drug abuse and exploitation of students.

Kerala High Court Orders Medical Board To Examine Jailed Kenyan Woman Seeking Medical Termination Of Pregnancy

Case title: Gware Margret Sebina v Union Of India

Case number: WP(C). NO. 9016 OF 2024

A thirty-two year old Kenyan woman lodged in Women's Jail And Correction Home Viyyur has approached the Kerala High Court seeking permission for medical termination of pregnancy.

Justice Devan Ramachandran has directed the petitioner to be examined by a medical board. 

“Pending consideration whether the petitioner's request in this writ petition can be granted, I deem it necessary that she be evaluated by a competent Medical Board to be constituted at the Medical College Hospital, Thrissur.”

The Court thus directed the Superintendent of Medical College Hospital, Thrissur to constitute a medical board. It further directed the Superintendent Of Jail Viyyur Women's Jail And Correction Home to bring the petitioner before the medical board on March 14, 2024, at 11 am for medical evaluation.

KSIDC Can't Escape SFIO Probe On Ground That It Is A Govt Agency, May Lose Reputation Before Public: Centre To Kerala High Court

Case title: Kerala State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd (KSIDC), Vs Union Of India, Shone George Vs Ministry Of Corporate Affairs

Case number: WP(C) 4896/ 2024, WP(C) 42092/ 2023

The Central Government, Director General of Corporate Affairs, Registrar of Companies and Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) has filed a reply before the Kerala High Court stating that the Kerala State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd (KSIDC) could not take shelter and escape from the investigation conducted by the SFIO stating that they are a government agency and would lose reputation before the public.

The Court had earlier directed KSIDC to prove their bonafides to remove them from the investigation conducted by the SFIO into CMRL, Exalogic Solutions and KSIDC. Exaologic Solutions, an IT company owned by CM Pinarayi Vijayan's daughter, is allegedly involved in the CMRL bribery case. 

Justice Devan Ramachandran today orally stated that it assumed that the KSIDC would have requested an investigation by the SFIO since they are a responsible public sector undertaking and it must get rid of all allegations of siphoning off crores of money. The Court orally remarked thus:

Defer Online Film Reviews For 48 Hours After Release : Amicus Curiae Tells Kerala High Court

Case Title: Mubeen Rauf v. Union of India & Ors. 

Case Number: WP(C) NO. 32733 OF 2023

The Amicus Curiae in a matter relating to "review bombing" of films has told the Kerala High Court the need for guidelines to govern movie reviews of social media influencers on online platforms which can not only protect the integrity of the filmmaking process but also safeguard the interests of the audience. The report suggested measures including a 48 hour waiting period for reviews following the release of movies, and maintaining a respectful tone for such reviews.

Justice Devan Ramachandran appointed the amicus curiae in a plea filed by the director of 'Aromalinte Adyathe Pranayam', seeking a gag order to ensure that social media influencers and film reviewing vloggers do not publish any reviews of the film for at least 7 days following its release, and another by the Producers' Association highlighting "review bombings" against newly released films.

Supreme Court Collegium Recommends Appointment Of Six Advocates As Judges Of Kerala High Court

The Supreme Court Collegium headed by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, has recommended the names of six Advocates for appointment as Judges of the Kerala High Court.

The following are the Advocates who have been recommended to be elevated as Judges of the High Court of Kerala:

1. Abdul Hakim Mullappally Abdul Aziz
2. Syam Kumar Vadakke Mudavakkat
3. Harishankar Vijayan Menon
4. Manu Sreedharan Nair
5. Eswaran Subramani
6. Manoj Pulamby Madhavan

Political Background Not Sufficient Reason To Deny Judgeship: Supreme Court Collegium Rejects Centre's Objection Over CPI(M) Affiliation

On March 12, 2024, the Supreme Court collegium headed by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud recommended the name of Shri Manoj Pulamby Madhavan for appointment as Judge of the Kerala High Court.

In evaluating the suitability of Shri Manoj, the collegium evaluated and scrutinized all the materials available on record. The Department of Justice had observed that Shri Manoj was a CPI(M) sympathiser and was appointed as a Government Pleader in 2010 and 2016-2021 by the LDF Government.

The collegium stated that the observation that Shri Manoj was a CPI(M) sympathiserwas 'extremely vague'. It stated that the political background of a candidate may not be a sufficient reason to reject his appointment as a judge. “The input that the candidate is considered to be a CPI(M) sympathizer is otherwise vague and bereft of cogent grounds”, stated the collegium resolution.

"Even otherwise, the mere fact that the candidate has had a political background may not be a sufficient reason in all cases."

Kerala High Court Issues Notice On Plea By European Company Seeking Restoration Of ₹75 Crores Attached By ED In 2017

Case title: Partner Lease OOD v Deputy Director, Directorate Of Enforcement & Ors.

Case number: CRL. M.C. 1689 of 2024

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas has issued notice to the ED and the Standing Counsel has sought time for filing a statement. 

The amount was attached by the ED since Trade International, an Indian proprietorship firm allegedly using forged shipping documents tried to fraudulently obtain 75 crores of rupees as sale consideration for the export of sunflower oil and sugar from a Bulgarian Company called Zvezda – AD.

Asst Public Prosecutor Aneeshya's Mother Moves Kerala High Court Seeking CBI Probe Into Her Suicide, Alleges Criminal Conspiracy By Her Superiors

Case title: Smt Prasanna v State of Kerala & Others

Case number: WP(Crl.) 289/2024

The mother of S Aneeshya, has approached the Kerala High Court seeking a fair and proper investigation by an independent agency like the CBI into the criminal conspiracy that led to the suicide of her daughter on January 21, 2024.

Aneeshya was working as an Assistant Public Prosecutor (APP) at Munisff Magistrate Court in Kollam and it is alleged that she committed suicide due to continuous mental harassment and torture from her superiors at work. It was alleged that Aneeshya faced male dominance and sexist attitudes from her superiors at work that caused her depression and mental stress.

Consumer Forum Vacancies Will Create Hardships For Common Citizens: Kerala HC Permits Incumbent Members To Continue Till Fresh Appointments

Case Number: WP(C) No. 7999 of 2024 

Case Title: Confederation of Consumer Vigilance Centre v. Union of India and ors.

The Kerala High Court has directed the State and the Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department to allow the President of State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission as well as President and members of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission to continue in their respective posts as a temporary measure. The court was hearing a petition against the vacancies in the department.

“Taking into consideration of the fact that notification is yet to be published, there will be an interim direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to allow the President of State Commission as well as President and members of the District Commission to continue in the said posts as a temporary measure, as per the Rules prevailing when they were appointed, till the finalisation of the selection process and consequent appointments are made by the appropriate Government” observed Justice Basant Balaji

Centre Notifies Appointment Of 6 Additional Judges In High Court Of Kerala

The Central Government has notified the appointment of six advocates as Additional Judges in the High Court of Kerala. The Supreme Court Collegium had recommended their names for appointment as Judges on 12 March 2024.

Kerala High Court Grants Interim Exemption To Mother From Payment Of IGST On Imported Medicine For Rare Disease

Case title: Amrutha S v Union of India

Case number: WP(C) NO. 6972 OF 2024

The Kerala High Court has issued an interim order exempting a mother from paying IGST on import of Risdiplam medicine for her three-year-old son who is suffering from a life-threatening rare disease called Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA).

Justice Gopinath P invoking the writ jurisdiction of the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution stated that the petitioner is qualified to get an exemption from tax payment since her application seeking tax exemption was pending before the Union Finance Minister.

Kerala High Court Issues Standard Operating Procedure For Attending Proceedings Through Video Conferencing

The Kerala High Court issued guidelines for attending court proceedings through Video Conferencing (VC) called Standard Operating Procedure (SOP). This shall be in addition to the existing Electronic Video Linkage Rules for Courts (Kerala) 2021.

Lesbian Couple Moves Kerala High Court Against Forced Conversion Therapy; Seeks Action Against Hospital Authorities & Formulation Of Guidelines

Case number: WP (C) No. 11329/ 2024

A lesbian couple, who were assigned female at birth have approached the Kerala High Court alleging that they were subjected to forced conversion therapy by their parents to change their sexual orientation.

The second petitioner alleged that her partner, the first petitioner was subjected to forceful and illegal treatments at Manohar Hospital, Kozhikode by injecting drugs and medicines against her will claiming that she is mentally disordered.

Plea Challenges Amendment To S.14 Of Kerala Lok Ayukta Act In High Court, Says It Empowers Executive To Nullify Judicial Order

Case Title: WP(C) 11107/ 2024

Case Number: N Prakash Vs State Of Kerala

A plea has been moved before the Kerala High Court challenging the Kerala Lok Ayukta (Amendment) Act, 2022 insofar as it amends Section 14 of the principal Act. The Amendment was passed by the Kerala Legislative Assembly and the President gave assent to it on February 09, 2024.

The plea states that the newly substituted section 14 violates the doctrine of separation of powers by granting the executive authority with appellate powers and takes away the power of the Lok Ayukta.

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice A J Desai and Justice V G Arun is hearing the matter and has directed the Advocate General to file a reply statement. The matter has been posted to June 06, 2024.

Brahmapuram Fire Case: Kerala High Court Suo Moto Impleads Southern Railways For Prevention Of Waste Dumping Around Railway Tracks

Case title: Suo Moto v. State of Kerala

Case number: WP(C) NO. 7844 OF 2023

The Kerala High Court has suo moto impleaded the Southern Railways authorities over the issue of prevention of waste dumping around railway tracks, in light of the Brahmapuram fire disaster.

The Special Bench comprising Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas and Justice Gopinath P along with other officials visited the Brahmapuram site on March 07, 2024, to evaluate the progress of waste treatment undertaken at Brahmapuram site.

It also stated that the Kochi Corporation must explore the possibilities of providing internal roads through the Brahmapuram site to enable the free movement of vehicles and fire engines.

Kerala High Court Stays Chancellor's Order Removing Calicut University VC

Case Title: Dr. MK Jayaraj v. The Chancellor, University of Calicut and ors.

Case Number: WP(C) No. 10520 of 2024

The Kerala High Court on Thursday stayed the order of Governor and Chancellor Arif Mohammed Khan removing MK Jayaraj as the Vice-Chancellor of the Calicut University. However, the court refused to interfere in the removal of MV Narayanan, Vice-Chancellor of the Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit. 

The court was hearing petitions challenging the Chancellor's order stating their appointments to be void ab initio due to the inclusion of the Chief Secretary in the search committee, which he considered to be violative of the UGC regulations. 

The bench of Justice Mohammed Nias CP pointed out the relevant work history of the Chief Secretary and rejected the argument that the chief secretary cannot be construed as a person of eminence from the field of higher education. The court also noted that while regulations 7.3(i) mention academics, the same is absent in 7.3(ii) and as such, concluded that those individuals from the field of higher education need not necessarily be academics.

Don't Commence Vacation Classes Without Court Permission: Kerala High Court To Unaided Minority School

Case title: Principal v State of Kerala & Connected Cases

Case number: WP(C) NO. 1931 OF 2024 & Connected Cases

The Principal of an unaided minority senior secondary school has approached the Kerala High Court seeking permission to conduct vacation classes in May for standards IX to XII.

The Division Bench comprising Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen stated that classes cannot be commenced without obtaining orders from the Court. 

“If the petitioners want to intimate the students about the commencement of the vacation class, they are free to do so. However, the commencement of the vacation class shall only be after obtaining the orders from this Court. The petitioners, therefore, are free to intimate the staff as well as the students”, stated the Court.

[Masala Bonds Case] Probe Delayed Due To Non-Cooperation Of Dr Thomas Isaac, Conduct Unbecoming Of Law Abiding Citizen: ED To Kerala High Court

Case title: Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board V Director, Thomas Issac v Deputy Director

Case number: WPC 1377/2024 & WPC 3719/2024

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has informed the Kerala High Court that its probe into alleged irregularities in masala bonds floated by Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board (KIIFB) is being delayed since August 2022 due to non-cooperation of former Finance Minister Dr Thomas Isaac and officials from the KIIFB.

In an affidavit filed by its Deputy Director before the bench of Justice TR Ravi, ED said Dr Thomas was Chairman of the Executive Committee and Vice Chairman of the General Body Committee and was instrumental in making decisions regarding the utilization of funds in connection with the masala bonds. However, he did not appear despite issuance of summons and direction from the Court to cooperate with the investigation.

EPF Pension : EPFO Circular To Fix Higher Pension On Pro-Rata Basis Questioned In Kerala High Court

Case Title: VR Balu v. Union of India and ors. 

Case Number: WP(C) No. 8177 of 2024

A retired employee of the Kerala Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation has moved the High Court challenging a circular of the Employees Provident Fund Organization, implementing pro-rata (in proportion) system for higher pensions for those retiring from September 1, 2014.

Petitioner seeks that his pension be calculated by taking an average of 60 months salary as provided under the Pension Scheme, 1995. Pro-rata system leads to a significant reduction in the pension sum, he contended.

On March 26, single bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran noted that certain portions of the pension are admitted by the government and thus directed them to pay those sums, subject to further orders from the Court. “Needless to say, if any further amounts are found due by this court, the same shall be also be paid by the respondents to the petitioner in due course,” it ordered.

Kerala High Court Partially Stays Centre's Ban On 'Ferocious & Dangerous' Dog Breeds

Case title: Limjith K J v State of Kerala 

Case number: WP(C) NO. 12760 OF 2024

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday partially stayed the operation of a circular dated March 12, 2024, issued by the Union Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying Department, whereby import, trading and selling of around 23 breeds of dogs which were identified as ferocious have been prohibited.

The Court passed the above order while considering a writ petition filed by certain dog lovers who were also owners of such breeds of dogs. 

While partially staying the circular, Justice T R Ravi held thus:

“I have gone through the orders issued. In such circumstances, there will be a direction staying the operation of notification dated 12.03.2024 except with regard to prohibition on import and selling of the dogs for the breeds specified therein, subject to further orders in this writ petition.”