Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 26 To July 2, 2023

"Mutual Respect Between Bench And The Bar Indispensable": Kerala HC Refuses To Transfer Ranjith Sreenivasan Murder Trial On Plea Alleging Judicial Bias

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

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 291

The Kerala High Court refused to transfer the trial in the Ranjith Sreenivasan Murder case from the Court of Additional Sessions Judge in Mavelikkara in a petition filed by persons accused in the case.

The transfer petition was filed by 15 persons who are accused of murdering BJP leader and advocate Ranjith Sreenivasan on account of political rivalry. The accused are said to be the workers of the Socialist Democratic Party of India/Popular Front of India (SDPI/PFI).

The case of the accused person was that there was reasonable apprehension that they will not get a fair trial if the Additional Sessions Judge - I, Mavelikkara is permitted to proceed with the case.

Kerala High Court Directs State Police Chief To Sensitize Police Personnel To Mental Healthcare Act

Case Title: XXX V. State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 292

The Kerala High Court directed the State Police Chief to ensure that Police Officers are familiar with the provisions of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 so that they can sensitively deal with cases involving mentally ill persons.

A single bench of Justice K Babu considered the suggestion made by the Amicus Curiae in the matter to direct the competent authorities to make sure that Police Officers are given proper training in the Mental Healthcare Act.

[S.18 MSME Act] Challenge To Facilitation Council Order Lies With High Court Having Territorial Jurisdiction Over Council: Kerala High Court

Case Title: M/S.Shreyas Marketing V. Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 293

The Kerala High Court held that the challenge to an order issued by the Facilitation Council under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, for a dispute between a supplier and buyer, would lie with the High Court in whose territorial jurisdiction the Facilitation Council is located.

A single bench of Justice Viju Abraham observed that under Section 18 of the MSME Act, the jurisdiction to issue an order lies with the Facilitation Council in the place where the supplier is located and hence such an order could only be challenged in the High Court having territorial jurisdiction over such Facilitation Council.

[Senior Citizen Couple] Kerala High Court Holds Convenience Of Wife To Be Prioritised In Petition For Transfer Of Matrimonial Dispute

Case Title: Rajam Babu V Babu K.K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 294

The Kerala High Court held that when a wife seeks transfer of a matrimonial case to a court of her convenience, it should ordinarily be allowed by the court.

A division bench of Justice Anil K Narendran and Justice P G Ajithkumar passed the order relying on a catena of Apex Court decisions that held that the convenience of the wife has to be prioritised in a petition for transfer of a matrimonial dispute.

Kerala High Court Closes Suo Moto Proceedings In Ponnambalamedu Trespassing Incident, Takes Note Of Surveillance Measures

Case Title: Suo Motu v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 295

The Kerala High Court disposed of the suo moto case initiated in the matter relating to the alleged trespass by some persons into the sacred 'Kalthara' of Ponnambalamedu, a protected forest area near the Sabarimala Temple.

Certain persons had allegedly trespassed and performed pooja in the protected area. The issue came to light after a video of the same surfaced online. The Court in this light initiated a suo motu case and took action on the report of Sabarimala special commissioner.

Kerala High Court Upholds Village Officer's Conviction And 6 Months Jail-Term For Obtaining ₹500 Bribe

Case Title: K.R. Muhammed Nazer v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 296

The Kerala High Court recently dismissed the appeal preferred by a Village Officer who had been convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, for obtaining bribe for issuing a location map for a property.

"Admittedly, the appellant was a public servant as defined under Section 2(c) of the P.C. Act working in his capacity as Village Officer on the date of the alleged incident. The sequence of events and circumstances narrated above clearly proves that the appellant has accepted Rs.500/- as illegal gratification from the decoy witness by abusing his official position as public servant and availed pecuniary advantage by adopting corrupt and illegal means. Thus, the court below was absolutely justified in convicting the appellant for the offence under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the P.C. Act," the Single Judge Bench of Justice Kauser Edappagath observed while upholding the sentence and conviction.

[Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules] 15 Days' Notice For 'No Confidence Motion' To Be Computed From Date Of Issuance Of Notice: High Court

Case Title: Joshy Pereppadan V. Joint Registrar Co-Operative Societies (General)

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 297

The Kerala High Court recently held that 'fifteen clear days notice' prescribed for convening a meeting for removal of the President or Vice-President of a cooperative society by a no-confidence motion under Rule 43-A(ii) of Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969 is to be computed from the date of issuance of notice and not from the date of service of notice.

A single bench of Justice Murali Purushothaman observed that if such an interpretation is not given, people may evade the service of notice indefinitely making the provision unworkable.

Kerala High Court Dismisses Shajan Skaria's Appeal Against Rejection Of Anticipatory Bail In MLA's Complaint Under SC/ST Act

Case Title: Shajan Skaria v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 298

The Kerala High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the editor and publisher of YouTube Channel Marunadan Malayali, Shajan Skariah, against rejection of anticipatory bail by Special Court in a case against him for allegedly broadcasting derogatory news item against MLA Sreenijin.

"It is pertinent to note that the allegations levelled against the second respondent include murder and contains insinuation against the second respondent's father in law, aspersions on unnamed judicial officers and bestows the title 'Mafia Don' on the second respondent. As such, it can unhesitatingly be held that the video contains insults, which are intended to humiliate the second respondent (MLA Sreenijin) in public view," the Single Judge Bench of Justice V.G. Arun observed while passing the order.

Has Journalism Changed To 'Defame, Denigrate, Damnify & Destroy'? Kerala High Court Asks In 'Marunadan Malayali' Case

Kattakkada Christian College Elections Row: Kerala High Court Dismisses Anticipatory Bail Pleas Of Principal, SFI Leader

Case Title: Shyju G.J. v. State of Kerala and Visakh A. v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 299

The Kerala High Court dismissed the anticipatory bail pleas of the former Principal of Christian College, Kattakada, G.J. Shyju, and Student Federation of India (SFI) leader Visakh A in the case related to alleged impersonation, falsification of documents and misrepresentation during the college elections held in May 2023.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, on being informed that the accused were willing to surrender before the Investigating Officer on July 4, 2023, directed that,

"...in the event of the two petitioners surrendering before the IO on or before 04.07.2023, they shall be subjected to interrogation, and thereafter, the procedure as contemplated under law shall be complied with".

[Gold Smuggling] Cumulative Value Of Illegal Import By Persons With Common Intention To Determine Whether Offence Bailable: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Pulikkippoyil Sharafudheen & Anr. v. Superintendent of Customs

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 300

The Kerala High Court declared that where gold that is imported illegally, is carried by different persons, all of whom had the common intention, the acts of such persons collectively can be treated as an act done by each person individually. It was thus held that the cumulative value of the goods could then be ascertained to determine whether the offence is bailable or non-bailable.

The Single Judge Bench of Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas took note that under the erstwhile Customs Act, 1952 (hereinafter, 'Act, 1952'), all offences under the Act were bailable, as clearly stipulated under Section 104(6) of the statute.

However, the Court noted that after the enactment of the Finance Act, 2013, the said provision was amended, and Section 104(6)(c) presently states that, if good have been imported without declaration in accordance with the provisions of the Act, if the value of goods exceeds one crore of rupees, the offence would be non-bailable.

Award By Lok Adalat Non Executable If It Does Not Contain Signature Of Both Parties To Settlement: Kerala High Court

Case Title: K R Jayaprakash V. State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 301

The Kerala High Court recently held that an award passed by the Lok Adalat which does not contain the signatures of both parties to the settlement is not valid in the eyes of law. The Court also held that the signature of the counsels for the parties would not be enough to give validity to the award.

A single bench of Justice Viju Abraham referred to Section 22C (7) of the Legal Services Authorities Act,1987, Regulation 33 of the Kerala State Legal Services Authority Regulation, 1998 and Regulation 17 of the National Legal Services Authority (Lok Adalats) Regulations, 2009 to conclude that both the parties must affix their signatures to the award and when the parties are represented by counsels they must also affix their signatures.

Case Title: P. Ardra Menon & Ors. v. The Chairman, Bar Council Of Kerala & Anr.

A group of law graduates from various law colleges of Kerala have approached the High Court with a plea to conduct enrolments as expeditiously as possible.

The issue surfaces amidst the ongoing dispute as regards the enrolment fee to be collected by the Bar Council of Kerala (BCK), which in turn, has resulted in a delay in conducting enrolments to the Bar.

The Kerala High Court had, on June 16, 2023, directed the Bar Council of Kerala to collect only Rs.750/- as enrolment fee from law graduates wishing to enrol, until the Bar Council of India (BCI) fixes a uniform fee structure as directed by the Supreme Court. The order was passed by a division bench of Chief Justice S V N Bhatti and Justice Basant Balaji in an appeal filed by the Bar Council of Kerala against the order of a Single Judge restricting the enrolment fee to Rs. 750/-.

'Marunadan Malayali' Editor Shajan Skaria Moves Kerala High Court Against Denial Of Anticipatory Bail In MLA's Complaint; Order Reserved

Case Title: Shajan Skaria v. State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court reserved for orders the appeal filed by the editor and publisher of YouTube Channel Marunadan Malayali, Shajan Skariah, against rejection of anticipatory bail by Special Court in a case against him for allegedly broadcasting derogatory news item against MLA Sreenijin.

The Single Judge Bench of Justice V.G. Arun has posted the matter on Friday for pronouncement of the Order.

The appellant-accused Skaria had telecast a news item regarding alleged mal-administration of Sports Hostel at the instance of de facto complainant in his capacity as the Chairman, District Sports Council.

The prosecution case against the appellant was that the said news item contained false, baseless and defamatory allegations against the de facto complainant, who belongs to the scheduled caste, with an intention to insult him. It was further alleged that the said news item promoted feelings of enmity, hatred, or ill-will against members of the scheduled caste or scheduled tribe.

Mere Pendency Of Criminal Case Not Ground To Refuse Arms License When There Is Serious Apprehension To Life: Entrepreneur Moves Kerala High Court

Case Title: Alexander Vadakkedom v. Land Revenue Commissioner & Ors.

A plea has been moved in the Kerala High Court by an entrepreneur against the order of the District Magistrate rejecting the renewal of his 'Arms license'.

Single Judge Bench of Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan has admitted the matter and sought the response of the State authorities.

The petitioner, who is involved in the construction activities of flats and villas in and around Thiruvananthapuram District averred that his business involves risks to his person and property due to which he had applied for an 'Arms license' involving (a) Gun (b) pistol for self-protection, and obtained the same after complying with the legal procedures. The petitioner stated that his Arms License had been issued with effect from 1992 and renewed continuously since then.

Kerala High Court Issues Notice On Kollam Doctor’s Parents’ Plea For CBI Probe Into Her Murder

Case Title: K.G. Mohandas & Anr. v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Ors.

The parents of Dr. Vandana Das, the 23-year-old house surgeon who was recently killed by an injured man at a government hospital in Kottarakkara, Kollam, have approached the Kerala High Court seeking transfer of probe to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

The Single Judge Bench of Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas on Friday considered the matter and issued notice to the respondent authorities.

The case pertains to the brutal murder of Dr. Vandana during the wee hours of the morning on May 10, while she was on duty. The young house surgeon was stabbed multiple times by Sandeep, a school teacher, using dressing room scissors. The attacker was brought to the Kottarakkara Taluk Hospital by the police for treatment of his injuries.

Kerala High Court Directs State To Take Action Against Municipal Corporations For Any Failure To Implement Action Plan Against Stray Dog Problem 

Case Title: In Re Bruno v. Union of India

In light of the recent increase in instances of dog bites by community dogs, the Kerala High Court has directed the State Government to submit the details of the progress of mass vaccination drives and setting up of shelters for stray dogs by the municipal corporations in the state.

A Division Bench of Justice A. K. Jayashankaran Nambiar and Justice Gopinath P directed the State to provide details of the steps taken by the Municipal Corporations to comply with the government order dated September 15, 2022, which was issued pursuant to the directions of the court to resolve the issues caused by stray dogs.