Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: February 27 To March 5, 2023

Nominal Index [Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 102-118]

Yasin Sunu V State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 102

Lalithambika & Ors. v. Grievance Redressal Committee & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 103

Jamshid P.V. v. State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 104

Sam Joseph V State of Kerala and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 105

K C Antony V State of Kerala and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 106

Pradeep and Others V State of Kerala and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 107

R. Helan Thilakom v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 108

A. Saudamini v. Union of India & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 109

Vimal K. Mohanan & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 110

Sabu @ Eetty Sabu v State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 111

Vishnu and Others V State of Kerala and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 112

Dr. Shiby M. Thomas v. The Hon'ble Chancellor, University of Calicut & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 113

Rajeev A R V State of Kerala and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 114

Hotel Hillway Park V State of Kerala & Others and connected cases 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 115

Geethakumary J. v. The District Educational Officer & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 116

Renjith v. State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 117

The Regional Cancer Centre Employees Co-Operative Society Ltd V Pushpa and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 118

Judgments/Order This Week

Trial Court Not Bound To Conduct Enquiry U/S 329 CrPC Merely On Counsel's Submission That Accused Is Of Unsound Mind: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Yasin Sunu V State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 102

The Kerala High Court recently held that a trial court is not bound to conduct a detailed enquiry into whether an accused is of unsound mind simply based on a submission made by the counsel for the accused.

A single bench of Justice K Babu observed, “If there is something in the demeanour of the accused or in the facts of the case, which raise doubt in the mind of the Court that the accused is of unsound mind and consequently incapable of making his defence, it is obligatory on the Court to try the said fact before proceeding with the trial into the charge.”

Joint Locker Hirer Not Liable To Secure Letter Of Administration To Operate Locker Upon Death Of One Of Hirers: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Lalithambika & Ors. v. Grievance Redressal Committee & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 103

The Kerala High Court recently held that a joint owner of a locker is entitled, as of right, to operate the locker, independent of the other owner, and thus, would not have to secure any letters of administration or probate under Section 29 of the Administrators-General Act, 1963, pursuant to the death of the other owner.

Perusing Section 218 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, that stipulates as 'to whom administration may be granted, where the deceased is a Hindu, Muhammadan, Budhist, Sikh, Jain or exempted person’, the Single Judge Bench of Justice Shaji P. Chaly observed:

"In my considered opinion, Section 218 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 stipulates the manner in which administration of estate is to be granted by a court of law, in cases where a person has died intestate. This is a case where the first petitioner, who is the joint owner of a locker hired from the Bank, was prevented by the Bank from operating the locker. To put it otherwise, in my considered view, Section 218 of the Act, 1925 has no application, since the petitioner is the joint owner, who is entitled, as of right, to operate the same, even according to the Bank, independent of the other joint hirer of the locker. There is also no requirement to secure any letters of administration under Section 29 of the Administrators-General Act, 1963. There is also no case for the respondent Bank that there is any litigation instituted by anyone in the matter of assets left by the deceased Sasidharan Pillai".

Granting Anticipatory Bail In Cases Of Attacks Against Doctors Would Lead To 'Dangerous Situation': Kerala High Court

Case Title: Jamshid P.V. v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 104

The Kerala High Court on Friday refused to grant anticipatory bail to a person who had attacked a doctor who examined his wife, alleging that the Doctor had misbehaved towards her.

The Single Judge Bench of Justice A. Badharudeen was of the view that granting anticipatory bail in such a case would lead to a 'dangerous situation', whereby doctors, who are duty bound to treat patients as part of their oath, would not get protection and the the proper maintenance of health of the public at large would also be in peril.

"Doctors, who had turmoiled their energy and time to learn the method of treating patients, when examining patients clinically, they cannot do the said exercise without touching the patients. If a patient, who wants treatment, is aggrieved in the matter of touch on the body of the petitioner as part of examination, it is difficult for a doctor to do his medical profession by resorting to clinical examination. The same would include placing of Stethoscope on the left chest portion of the patient to observe and evaluate the heart beat. At the same time, this Court is conscious of the fact that all allegations on the ground of misbehaviour by overstepping the limit of the doctor while examining patients are false. Genuine cases of such nature could not be ruled out in toto. But generally, it could be held that truth of those allegations should be evaluated from the materials and attending circumstances to separate the grain from the chaff," the Court said.

Kerala High Court Dismisses PIL Claiming Compensation For Transgender Persons Arrested For Waving Black Flag At CM Pinarayi Vijayan

Case Title: Sam Joseph V State of Kerala and Others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 105

The Kerala High Court recently dismissed a Public Interest Litigation that was filed for compensation for two transgender persons who were booked for obstructing the motorcade of Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan by waving black flags as a mark of protest, while he was attending an event in Ernakulam. The PIL filed sought for an inquiry into the “professional misconduct of the officers” involved in the incident and for compensation for the transgender persons who were detained.

A bench of Chief Justice S Manikumar & Justice Murali Purushothaman while dismissing the PIL observed that the petitioner failed to make out a case for the prayers sought for.

State Instrumentalities Must Deal With Citizens Fairly: Kerala High Court Orders Release Of Amount Withheld In Excess Of Quantified Loss In Road Project

Case Title: K C Antony V State of Kerala and Others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 106

The Kerala High Court recently held that the Government cannot retain any amount in excess of the loss already quantified by it with regard to the amount due to a contractor on the premise of breach of contract.“The State and its instrumentalities are expected to deal with the citizens in a fair manner in all circumstances.”, the court observed in this regard.

The division bench comprising of Justice A Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen was considering an appeal filed by a contractor, for recovery of claims and release of security deposit for work done for the Kerala State Construction Corporation in relation to a road project. The contract was awarded to the appellant but was subsequently terminated at the risk and cost of the appellant and another contractor was engaged for completion of the work.

Leniency Cannot Be Shown When Officers Of State Are Accused Of Heinous Crimes : Kerala High Court

Case Title: Pradeep and Others V State of Kerala and Others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 107

The Kerala High Court while refusing bail to two army personnel held that when the accused is an officer of the State, "leniency is not the sanction of law, instead rigidity is the rule of law" .

A single bench of Justice A.Badharudeen was hearing an anticipatory bail application where initially the offences registered against the petitioners were bailable, but subsequently the non-bailable offence of Section 307 (Attempt to Murder) of the Indian Penal Code, was added.

The petitioners requested that since two of the accused persons were army personnel, the court must take a lenient view. However, disagreeing with the said contention, the court observed that: "when heinous offences are alleged to be committed by the responsible officers of the State, viz. Police Officers, Excise Officers, Para military forces, Military persons and persons empowered with observance and implementation of law (list is not exhaustive), the same is an aggravating factor, to be taken note of, in deviation from the general principles, which would not apply to common man. If so, in such cases, leniency is not the sanction of law, instead rigidity is the rule of law."

Music Important For Child Development, Govt Must Consider Regular Music Teachers’ Post In Schools Irrespective Of Student Strength: Kerala High Court

Case Title: R. Helan Thilakom v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 108

The Kerala High Court recently recommended the Government to consider sanctioning regular Music teachers’ post in all schools, at least in primary section, irrespective of the student’s strength or number of periods.

The Court made the above recommendation, while considering the case of a Music teacher, who was forced to fight throughout her service to get a full-time post of, after completing five years in the part time post.

"Currently, the Music teacher’s post is sanctioned based on number of students in a school, number of periods etc. If the strength of students in one school is less, then the post of Music teacher will not be sanctioned in that school. This in reality is a discrimination to the student community because if a student is studying in a school where there is less number of students they will not get the help of a Music teacher when compared to the students of another school where there is a post of Music teacher solely because the number of students in that school is high. What sin is committed by a student for denying Music solely because he/she is studying in a school with less than the required number of students? The student’s strength or number periods in a school ought not have been a criteria for sanctioning at least for the post of Music teacher. Similarly additional financial liability to the state also should not be a reason for not sanctioning the post of music teachers in schools because the future of this nation is in the hands of the children", the Single Judge Bench of Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan observed.

Pension Liability For Services Rendered In North-East Frontier Agency Prior To It Becoming State Of Arunachal Pradesh Is On Centre: Kerala High Court

Case Title: A. Saudamini v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 109

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday held that when a person who had died in harness while being deployed in North Eastern Frontier Agency, now Arunachal Pradesh, which was directly under the administration of the Government of India at the time, the family pension liability would only be upon the Central Government and not on the Government of the State of Arunachal Pradesh.

"In the case of the petitioner’s father, his service was rendered and utilised when the Arunachal Pradesh (previously NEFA) was directly under the administration of the Government of India. Therefore, the service of late Sankaran Nair is relatable to Union purpose. The pension liability therefore cannot be fastened on the Government of the State of Arunachal Pradesh. The liability is entirely on the Union Government", the Single Judge Bench of Justice N. Nagaresh observed.

Is Accused Entitled To Default Bail If Charge Sheet Found Defective & Returned For Curing Defects After Statutory Period? Kerala High Court Answers

Case Title: Vimal K. Mohanan & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 110

The Kerala High Court recently considered whether in cases where final report is filed within the statutory time limit of investigation, accused person’s entitlement for bail under Section 167(2) CrPC would subsist, if the charge sheet is found defective, and returned for curing the defects after the statutory time limit is over.

Single Judge Bench of Justice V.G. Arun observed, 

"when faced with the Public Prosecutor's application seeking extension, or that of the accused demanding statutory bail, the court's consideration should be whether the final report was filed after completing the investigation. If the final report is found to have been filed after completing the investigation in all respects, minor defects in the report, by itself, will not confer the accused with any right to be enlarged on default bail. On the other hand, if the final report is filed without completing the investigation, in order to stultify the mandate of Section 167(2) and later returned to the investigating officer for completing the investigation, that would definitely entitle the accused to demand that he be released on default bail, if the final report, after completing the investigation and curing the defects, is not re-submitted in court before the 180th day".

Test Identification Parade Only Rule Of Prudence, Its Absence Does Not Necessarily Vitiate Identification Of Accused In Court: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Sabu @ Eetty Sabu v State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 111

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday held that the absence of a test identification parade, does not necessarily invalidate identification of an accused in court.

A single bench of Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas held that: “The object of a test identification parade is to test and ascertain the trustworthiness of the evidence regarding the identification of the accused. Test identification parade is only a rule of prudence. It is intended to be a measure of corroboration of the identification of the accused by the witnesses in court, especially when the accused are strangers. However, if the ocular evidence and the identification of the accused by the witnesses in court are impressive, nothing restricts the court from relying upon the said identification, as recognising the accused in court is the substantive evidence, while test identification parade is not an evidence of that character”

State Cannot Evade Responsibility To Pay A Contractor In The Guise Of Limitation Period: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Vishnu and Others V State of Kerala and Others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 112

The Kerala High on Wednesday held that the state cannot avoid its obligation to compensate a contractor for dues owed to him by invoking the ground of limitation.

A single bench of Justice Shaji P Chaly observed that

“Above all, in a welfare State, the State has the duty and obligation to protect the interests of its citizens, rather than finding ways and means to defeat their interests and means of livelihood. The scheme of part III of the Constitution of India dealing with ‘fundamental rights’ speaks eloquently of the responsibilities of the State to safeguard the well-being and prosperity of the citizens without fail. Therefore, when a citizen was engaged by the Government to carry out one of its activities, it had every duty to reward the person as agreed upon in the contract, even without asking for it.”

Hold Elections, Re-Constitute Senate Before June 30: Kerala High Court To Calicut University VC

Case Title: Dr. Shiby M. Thomas v. The Hon'ble Chancellor, University of Calicut & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 113

The Kerala High Court on Thursday directed that the Senate of the Calicut University be reconstituted after conducting the elections before June 30, 2023.

Justice Sathish Ninan passed the order in a plea filed by Dr. Shiby M. Thomas, a member of the Senate of the Calicut University that is set to complete its term of four years on March 6, 2023, alleging that the Vice Chancellor had failed to take steps for the conduct of election and re-constitution of the Senate, on time.

"In terms of Statute 13, after the publication of the electoral roll there has to be not less than 30 days before the election is notified under Statute 34. Having due consideration of the procedural formalities involved, it is ordered that, the elections shall be conducted, and the Senate re-constituted before 30th of June, 2023," the court declared.

Kerala High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To President, Secretary & Staff Member Of BSNL Engineers Co-op Society Accused Of Misappropriating Crores

Case Title: Rajeev A R V State of Kerala and Others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 114

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday denied pre-arrest bail to the President, Secretary and staff member of BSNL Engineers Co-operative Society who have been accused of misappropriating crores from the fixed deposits of the society.

The accused persons have been booked for misappropriating over 44 crores from the Society between 1st June 2019 and 16th June 2020. A single bench of Justice A. Badharudeen observed that while considering anticipatory bail applications for economic offences involving huge sums of money, extra care must be taken to ensure that granting such bail would not hamper the investigation.

“In this connection, it has to be observed that when persons apprehending arrest in non-bailable offences approach the Courts by resorting to Section 438 of Cr.P.C, the Courts having power to grant the relief of pre-arrest bail, not as a matter of right, but purely, as a matter of discretion, should evaluate the materials available prima facie to see the culpability of the accused and the consequence of granting pre-arrest bail. If grant of pre-arrest bail is akin to hampering the investigation where arrest and custodial interrogation are necessary, the Courts shall not exercise the discretion in favour of the persons who seek the discretionary relief. When misappropriation of huge amount of money is involved, the care must be more, in order to ensure that effective investigation shall not either be stalled or disturbed by granting pre-arrest bail".

There Would Be Reduced Instances Of Violence If Access To Liquor Is Prohibited Around Areas Of Religious Festivals: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Hotel Hillway Park V State of Kerala & Others and connected cases

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 115

The Kerala High Court on Thursday observed that when the sale of liquor is prohibited for a few days with the object of maintaining peace, preserving public order and for public good, commercial interests takes a back seat, even if it means experiencing a disruption in sales.

A division bench comprising Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice C. Jayachandran was hearing a batch of appeals and writ petitions filed challenging the order of the lower court that refused to stay the orders by two District Collectors that prohibited FL3 licensees and licensed toddy shops from selling liquor for a few days around three different locations where religious festivals were being held.

On addressing the concerns of the appellant about the huge losses they have to incur due to such bans, the court said: “We quite understand that the licensees have made substantial investments to carry on liquor vending, both foreign liquor and toddy. The disruption of sales for one or two days especially with the object of maintaining peace, for public good and preservation of public order, relegates commercial considerations to the back seat”. 

[Kerala Education Rules] Acharya Certificate Issued By Hindi Prachar Sabha Can Be Treated As Collegiate Training Such As B.Ed: High Court

Case Title: Geethakumary J. v. The District Educational Officer & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 116

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday held that the the Acharya certificate issued by the Kerala Hindi Prachar Sabha can be treated as a collegiate training such as B.T, L.T or B.Ed as provided under Explanation I to Rule 44A of Chapter XIV(A) of Kerala Education Rules (KER).

Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan passed the above order while considering a case relating to promotion of a High School Assistant to the post of Headmaster following 13 years of graduate service.

"For deciding the same, this Court has to read Rule (2) of Chapter XXXI of KER read with Explanation (1) to Rule 44A of Chapter XIV(A) of KER. There the graduate service is explained to the effect that the graduate service should be after acquisition of collegiate training such as B.T, L.T or B.Ed. Rule 44A Chapter of XIV(A) also states the minimum qualification for appointment as Headmaster. Since the explanation clearly says that after acquisition of collegiate training such as B.T, L.T or B.Ed, the candidate should be in graduate service as defined in that explanation. Hence it is clear that the qualification of B.T, L.T or B.Ed alone are not included but such other qualifications are also included," the Court observed.

Mere Registration Of Subsequent Case Against Accused By Itself Cannot Result In Automatic Cancellation Of Bail In Earlier Case: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Renjith v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 117

The Kerala High Court on Friday held that the bail granted in one crime cannot be cancelled merely because the accused has been subsequently booked in another case.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas observed that a bail that had once been granted ought not to be cancelled on the mere asking, but that there ought to be cogent and overwhelming circumstances existing to cancel the bail.

"The mere registration of a subsequent crime against the accused by itself cannot result in an automatic cancellation of bail. Registration of a subsequent crime is only an indication of an allegation or a complaint of the accused having been involved in a subsequent crime. The presumption of innocence available to the accused in the second crime, the right to liberty as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India which envelopes every provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure are factors which cannot be forgotten by the Court when called upon to cancel the bail. The possibility of false accusations being alleged with oblique motives also cannot be ignored. The nature of the subsequent offence and the persons against whom the offence is alleged to have been committed, the stage of the case wherein cancellation is sought are also factors that require appreciation. Apart from the above, while arriving at the conclusion to cancel the bail, the Court must also consider whether the accused had misused the liberty granted in such a manner that it has a tendency to interfere with the due course of the administration of justice. Thus, every case presents a unique situation and close scrutiny ought to be indulged in to identify whether overwhelming circumstances are indeed present in the subsequent crime which necessitates the cancellation of bail earlier granted," the Court observed.

Lokayukta Empowered To Decide Contract Cases Having Commercial Relations If Complainant Alleges Harassment: Kerala High Court

Case Title: The Regional Cancer Centre Employees Co-Operative Society Ltd V Pushpa and Others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 118

The Kerala High Court on Monday dismissed the pleas filed by Regional Cancer Centre (RCC) Employees Co-operative Society challenging the order of the Lokayukta that had ruled in favour of certain low paid Class-IV employees working as cleaners at the RCC.

The complainants before the Lokayukta, who were employees of RCC had stood as sureties to one of the employees for a loan of Rs.3 lakh. When the loanee defaulted in repayment of the loan, the Society started to recover the money from the monthly salary of the complainants that stood as sureties. This was challenged by the complainants before the Lokayukta.

A division bench comprising of Chief Justice S.Manikumar and Justice Murali Purushothaman was hearing the pleas filed by the RCC Co-operative Society against the order of the Lokayukta.

Other Significant Developments

Regional Colloquium on JJAct, Pocso Act And Drug Abuse Organised By Kerala HC Passes Resolution For Immediate Steps for Dispensation of Justice and Rehabilitation of Victims

The Regional Colloquium on Juvenile Justice Act,2015, PoCSO Act and Drug Abuse among Children organized by the High Court of Kerala entered its second and final day on Sunday. The Colloquium was organised to sensitise various stake holders of the justice delivery system handling cases involving children under different acts at various levels.

Justice C T Ravikumar, Judge, Supreme Court, addressed the valedictory function, through virtual mode. Justice S. Manikumar, Chief Justice, High Court of Kerala, Justice Alexander Thomas, Judge, High Court of Kerala and Chairman, PoCSO Committee and Justice Shaji P. Chaly, Judge, High Court of Kerala and Chairman, Juvenile Justice Committee were also present for the concluding session.

Kerala High Court Reserves Order On Pulsar Suni's Bail Plea In 2017 Actor Assault Case

Case Title: Sunil N.S. v. State of Kerala

The Kerala High Court on Monday reserved its decision on the bail application of Sunil N.S., also known as 'Pulsar Suni', the main accused in the 2017 Actor Assault Case.

Justice P.V Kunhikrishnan noted that there are several decisions which state that the gravity of the offence would also have to be considered in such offences, and that simply because an accused has remained in jail for so many years, cannot be a ground for release.

"The prima facie evidence of the victim, how brutal. I will consider this. Post for orders. Reserved," the court said.

Rape Survivor Moves Kerala High Court For Masking Of Identifiable Personal Information

Case Title: xxxxx v. High Court of Kerala

A plea has been moved in the Kerala High Court by a rape victim seeking the Court to issue directions to platforms such as Google an Indian Kanoon to ensure that the materials disclosing her identity as a rape victim are removed or hidden appropriately so as to protect her right to privacy guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

The matter is before the Single Judge Bench of Justice Shaji P. Chaly.

Contempt Case: Kerala High Court Grants Bail to 'V4 Kochi' President Nipun Cherian

Case Title: Suo Motu v. Nipun Cherian

The Kerala High on Monday granted bail to 'V4 Kochi' President Nipun Cherian, in connection with his arrest in the contempt case initiated against him for his statements against a sitting judge of the High Court.

In its order dated February 21,2023, a Division Bench comprising of Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. had directed the issuance of a non-bailable warrant to the District Police Chief, Ernakulam, for the arrest and production of Cherian due to the willful and continued absence of Cherian before the court in the contempt matter.

Measures Being Taken To Introduce Age-Appropriate Sexual Awareness Curriculum In Schools, State Informs Kerala High Court

Case Title: Anoop V State of Kerala

The Director of General Education has informed Kerala High Court that steps are being taken to commence classes related to sexual awareness in schools from the upcoming academic year, and measures are being taken to make it a part of the curriculum as soon as possible.

The DGE is the Chairman of the committee of experts formed by the State Government on the specific directions of the court in August 2022, to create age-appropriate sexual awareness curriculum in schools.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas had previously expressed his disappointment at the State for not taking measures to include prevention-oriented programmes on sexual abuse as part of school curriculum. In this regard, the court had ordered the Chairman and Convenor of the committee, the Director General of Education and the Additional Director of Education, to remain present before the court on February 27 to explain the details of the committee meetings and the measures taken by them.

Advocate Moves Kerala High Court Alleging That Sitting Judge Limits Number Of Cases Listed Daily

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

An advocate enrolled in the Bar Council of Kerala has moved the Kerala High Court alleging that a sitting judge has limited the number of cases listed before the bench to only 20 matters a day, when other judges have 100 matters or more listed before them everyday.

Advocate Yeshwanth Shenoy has filed a writ petition stating that ‘The Chief Justice, being the Master of Roster, alone has the power to direct the Registry on listing of matters and no Judge can interfere with the same and direct the Registry to curtail that list’.

When the matter came up before Justice Shaji P Chaly on Wednesday, the court directed the Registrar General of the High Court(4th respondent in the matter) to engage a counsel to proceed with the matter.

Kerala High Court Initiates Suo Motu Contempt Proceedings Against Lawyer For Alleged Misbehaviour In Court

The Kerala High Court has initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against Advocate Yeshwanth Shenoy for his alleged misbehaviour in Court.

The lawyer had allegedly displayed intemperate behaviour and raised allegations against Justice Mary Joseph, while appearing in a case before her. “I will see that Your Lordship will be unseated from this post,” Advocate Shenoy had allegedly shouted in Court after an exchange with the Judge.

Pursuant to the same, Justice Joseph had filed a complaint, and a suo motu contempt petition was filed in the matter by the High Court Registry. Proceedings in this regard had been initiated two weeks ago.

EPF Pension : Kerala High Court Restrains EPFO From Reducing Higher Pension Received By Petitioners

Case Title: Balagangadharan K.N. & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday, while considering the plea moved by persons aggrieved by the abrupt discontinuance or reduction of the pension that was being received by them, directed that the same shall not be curtailed, limited or stopped without specific orders from the Court.

Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. passed the above directive in light of the fact that the matter was under the active consideration of the Court.

"Having considered the submissions, as the matter is being adjourned at the request of the respondents and as the matter is under active consideration of this Court, the respondents shall ensure that they shall not curtail/limit/stop the pension that was being received by the petitioners in these writ petitions without getting specific orders from this Court," it was ordered.

Kerala Court Refuses Bail To CM's Former Principal Secretary M. Sivasankar In LIFE Mission Case

A Kerala Court on Thursday refused to grant bail to the former Principal Secretary to the Chief Minister of Kerala, M. Sivasankar, who had been arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in relation to the LIFE Mission Case.

A Special Court to try offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) dismissed Sivasankar's plea for bail.

Revolutionizing Justice- Exploring Kerala High Court's Innovative, Paperless E-Court System For More Accessible Justice [PART-1]

CJI DY Chandrachud has been at the helm of the e-Courts project of the Supreme Court of India, which is currently in its third phase. Guided by his vision, the Kerala High Court introduced a completely automated Case Management System (CMS), with a mission to become a paperless court.

The Information and Communication Technology (ICT) initiatives are led by the Chief Justice S. Manikumar. The ICT Committee of the High Court that had been constituted to realize this vision of paperless courts comprises of Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque, Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, Justice P.B. Sureshkumar, Justice Shaji P. Chaly, and Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V.

Maintainability Of Petition Doubtful': Kerala High Court Tells Lawyer Who Challenged Limited Number Of Cases Listed Before A Sitting Judge

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

The Kerala High Court on Friday questioned the maintainability of the petition filed by an advocate alleging that a sitting judge of the High Court was limiting the number of cases listed before her to only 20 matters a day, while other judges were handling 100 or more matters everyday.

When the matter came up before Justice Shaji P Chaly on Friday, he questioned the Advocate Yeshwanth Shenoy, the petitioner, on the maintainability of the petition.

“Going through the pleadings and the nature of contentions advanced by the petitioner, I am of the considered opinion that the maintainability of the writ petition is doubtful and therefore, without receiving a counter affidavit from the fourth respondent, i.e., the Registrar General of this Court, I think, it may not be appropriate on my part to proceed further either for the consideration of the main relief or the interim relief” the court said in its order.