Kerala High Court Monthly Digest: December 2022 [Citation 625-668]

Justice A. Badharudeen observed that, the inquiry envisaged under Section 340 of Cr.P.C is mandatory in nature and such an enquiry should be conducted before proceeding further, in cases involving allegation of commission of offences under Sections 192, 193 and 195 of IPC. Here, evidently, no such enquiry was conducted and therefore, the entire proceedings, thereafter, are non-est.

[Kerala Education Rules] Service Against Two Different Vacancies Not 'Continuous' To Be Reckoned For Vacation Salary: High Court

Case Title: Neetha Lukose v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 645

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday held that for the purposes of claiming vacation salary, the teacher should have a continuous service of eight months in the vacancy (not permanent) which extends over summer vacation, as per Rule 49 of Chapter XIV-A of the Kerala Education Rules.

The Court arrived at this finding while answering the pointed query as to whether service under two different appointments against two different vacancies which are not permanent could be reckoned for the purpose of claiming vacation salary.

The Division Bench comprising Justice P.B. Sureshkumar and Justice C.S. Sudha observed, that "the expression "vacancies" has been used in the provision, as there would be different types of vacancies which are not permanent and the purpose of the Rule is to confer on all those who are appointed in such vacancies, the benefit of vacation salary, provided the conditions stipulated in the provision are duly satisfied. If the provision is understood in the said fashion, there cannot be any doubt to the fact that the expression 'continuous service' has been used in the context of those vacancies which extend over summer vacation in which the teacher is appointed".

High Court Dismisses Writ By Kerala Private Bankers' Assn Against RBI's Insistence Requiring Small Financiers To Not Describe Themselves As 'Bank'

Case Title: All Kerala Private Bankers' Association v. The Commissioner of State Tax & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 647

The Kerala High Court recently dismissed a writ petition filed by All Kerala Private Bankers' Association against RBI's insistence requiring small financiers to not use the word 'Bank' as part of their names.

The Association, comprised of small financiers and unincorporated bodies registered under the Kerala Money Lenders Act, had also sought renewal of its members' licenses.

Justice V.G. Arun held that a writ petition by the Association would not be maintainable since the Association is not conducting money lending business on its own, and thus, could not amount to an 'aggrieved person'.

Sitting On Business License Renewal Applications For Long Can Pave Way For Corrupt Practices: Kerala High Court

Case Title: P.T. Prasannakumar & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 648

The Kerala High Court has expressed concern over the tendency of state authorities to sit on business renewal license applications, which in turn disrupts business activities and may pave way for corruption.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas while quashing the FIR registered against M/S Aditya Finance, a hire-purchase business entity regulated under the Kerala Money Lenders Act, 1958 said, that "a licensee of a running business establishment who had applied for renewal of his license, cannot be asked to wait indefinitely until the authority takes a decision. If the licensee has to stop his running business until a decision is taken, it will disrupt the business. This can also pave they way for corrupt practices and will be giving a premium to the ineptitude of the licensing authority".

Vismaya Dowry Death Case: Kerala High Court Refuses To Suspend Husband Kiran Kumar's 10-Yrs Sentence

Case Title: Kiran Kumar S v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 649

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday dismissed the application filed by Kiran Kumar, the convict in the Vismaya dowry death case, seeking an interim order for suspension of his 10 years sentence.

The application was moved in a Criminal Appeal against his conviction and sentence handed down in May this year following his wife's death under mysterious circumstances, after she had complained of dowry harassment.

The Division Bench consisting of Justice Alexander Thomas and Justice Sophy Thomas observed that, taking into account the nature of accusation, seriousness of the offence and also its social impact, this is not a fit case warranting suspension of sentence. Moreover, the presumption of innocence goes with the conviction and sentence. There is no patent infirmity in the order of conviction to render it prima facie erroneous...Pending appeal, if the sentence is suspended so as to release the applicant/appellant on bail, it will send a wrong message to the society. For all these reasons, we are not inclined to allow this application.

Even If Dowry Is Not Demanded Before Or At The Time Of Marriage, Subsequent Demand Is Sufficient To Attract Dowry Prohibition Act: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Kiran Kumar S v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 649

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday, while dismissing the application filed by Kiran Kumar, the convict in the Vismaya dowry death case, seeking an interim order for suspension of his 10 years sentence, observed that even if there was no demand for dowry before or at the time of marriage, the subsequent demand made is sufficient to attract the definition of dowry under Section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

Division Bench consisting of Justice Alexander Thomas and Justice Sophy Thomas while expressing concern on the rise in atrocities against women in their matrimonial homes and harassment for dowry, observed that while enacting Section 304B of the IPC, the Legislature strongly intended to curb the social evil of dowry demand. Section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act was amended with effect from 19.11.1986, and Section 304B dowry death was introduced in the Indian Penal Code with effect from the very same day, i.e., on 19.11.1986. Section 113 B presumption as to dowry death was also introduced in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, on the same day i.e., 19.11.1986. So the Legislative intent in bringing out these amendments in all the three statues simultaneously will show the strong desire to eradicate the social evil of dowry death from the society using the iron hands of law.

Shocking That Many Innocent Persons Are Victims Of False Cases Under SC/ST Prevention Of Atrocities Act : Kerala High Court

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

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 650

The Kerala High Court on Friday observed that many innocent persons are victims of false implication under the SC/ST (POA) Act.

"It is shocking, rather a mind blowing fact that many innocent persons are victims of false implication under the SC/ST (POA) Act", the Court observed while considering an application seeking anticipatory bail. It cautioned that possibility of false implications of innocent people as accused, with a view to achieve ulterior motives of the complainant, must be ruled out.

Noting that many innocent persons are falling victim to false implications under the SC/ST (POA) Act, Justice A. Badharudeen observed that the courts should have a duty to rule out the possibilities of false implication of innocent persons as accused, with a view to achieve ulterior motives of the complaints, with threat of arrest and detention of the accused in custody, because of the stringent provisions in the SC/ST (POA) Act in the matter of grant of anticipatory bail.

Therefore, it is the need of the hour for the courts to segregate the grain from the chaff by analysing the genesis of the case, the antecedents prior to registration of the crime, with reference to existence of animosity between the complainant and the accused, with particular attention, vis-a-vis previous disputes/cases/ complaints, etc. while considering the question of prima facie case, when considering plea for pre-arrest bail.

NEET | Candidates Who Secured Admission During First & Second Counselling Cannot Participate In Mop-Up Round: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Gauri Sajit v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 651

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday directed the Commissioner for Entrance Commission to not permit the students who had already secured admission and joined in the first and second round of allotment to participate in the mop up counselling of NEET Examination.

Justice V.G. Arun passed the above order after taking note of the Medical Council of India Regulations on Graduate Medical Education, 1997, which stipulates that candidates who have joined for seats under the All India Quota and State Quota cannot appear for further counselling, and which aspect was also highlighted in the notification issued by the Directorate General of Health Services.

'Each Day's Delay Will Add To Victim's Agony': Kerala High Court Permits Minor To Terminate Pregnancy Of 26 Weeks

Case Title: X v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 652

The Kerala High Court on Monday allowed a minor rape victim to terminate her 26-week pregnancy.

Justice V.G. Arun said the continuation of the pregnancy could affect the mental health of the 17 year old girl, who suffers from intellectual disability.

"In the case at hand, the Medical Board after considering all aspects, has opined that the continuation of the pregnancy can seriously affect the mental health of the victim, and she is likely develop depression and psychosis. In view of the Medical Board's opinion, and considering the mental status of the victim, I am inclined to allow the prayer for medical termination of the pregnancy", the Court observed.

Report Filed By Investigating Officer Does Not Satisfy Mandate Of S.36A(4) NDPS Act: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Muhammed Ajmal v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 653

The Kerala High Court has reiterated that the request of an investigating officer seeking extension of statutory 180 days period is not a substitute for the report of public prosecutor as envisaged under Section 36A of the NDPS Act.

The provision stipulates that if it is not possible to complete the investigation within 180 days, the Special Court may extend the said period up to one year on the report of the Public Prosecutor indicating the progress of the investigation and the specific reasons for detention beyond 180 days.

Justice A. Badharudeen remarked, that it is relevant, rather shocking to note that the Public Prosecutor who was appointed by the State to conduct serious cases of this nature, even not cared at least to read Section 36-A(4) and its proviso, before filing the report of the Investigating Officer pressing for extension of detention of the accused beyond the period of 180 days... Indubitably, it is held that, the report/petition filed by the Investigating Officer cannot be considered as a report/petition envisaged under Section 36-A(4), since the Investigating Officer has no such right. So every bit in the matter of extension is void ab initio.

S.125 CrPC Confers Implied Power To Grant Interim Maintenance: Kerala High Court

Case Title: M.K. Gheevarghese v. Mariam Gheevarghese

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 654

The Kerala High Court recently reiterated that in the absence of any express bar or prohibition, Section 125 Cr.P.C. could be interpreted as conferring power by necessary implication to make interim order of maintenance subject to final outcome in the application.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice P.G. Ajithkumar while holding so, noted that the Apex Court in its decision in Shaila Kumari Devi v. Krishnana Bhagwan Pathak (2008) observed, that "so far as 'interim' maintenance is concerned, it is true that Section 125 of the Code as it originally enacted did not expressly empower the Magistrate to make an order directing payment of interim maintenance. But the Code equally did not prohibit the Magistrate from making such an order. Now, having regard to the nature of proceedings, the primary object to secure relief to deserted and destitute wives, discarded and neglected children and disabled and helpless parents and to ensure that no wife, child or parent is left beggared and destitute on the scrap-heap of society so as to be tempted to commit crime or to tempt others to commit crime in regard to them, it was held that the Magistrate had 'implied power' to make orders to pay interim maintenance. The jurisdiction of the Magistrate under Chapter IX (Order for Maintenance of Wives, Children and Parents) is not strictly criminal in nature. Moreover, the remedy provided by Section 125 of the Code is a summary remedy for securing reasonable sum by way of maintenance".

Which Law Applies For Payment Of Court Fees In Contested Application For Probate Or Letters Of Administration? Kerala High Court Answers

Case Title: K.G. Sunilkrishnan v. K.G. Premsankar

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 655

The Kerala High Court recently said that when an original petition is converted to a suit as contemplated under Rule 26 of the Indian Succession Rules (Kerala), 1968, the court fee has to be paid under Article 11 (k) of Schedule II of the Court Fees Act.

A trial court had earlier directed a plaintiff to pay court fees under Section 25(a) of the Act read with Article 1 Schedule I of the Court Fees Act, even after conversion of original petition to suit. However, Justice C.S. Dias said the same is incorrect and wrong.

The court said Chapter VI of the Kerala Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959 deals with the manner in which court fee is to be computed and paid on applications filed for probate, letter of administration and certificate of administration.

S.33(5) POCSO Act | Child Witness Can Be Recalled For Just Decision Of Case; Bar On Special Courts Not Absolute: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Vineeth v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 656

The Kerala High Court on Monday observed that the statutory bar imposed on Special Courts by Section 33(5) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as 'POCSO Act') to ensure that a child is not repeatedly called to to testify in the court is not absolute.

Justice Kauser Edappagath observed, that the bar under Section 33(5) of POCSO Act is not absolute. In appropriate cases, if it is necessary for the just decision of the case, of course the child witness can be recalled.

Case Title: Dr Asha Sreedhar v. Dr Shahinamole S and Connected Cases

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 658

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday reiterated that the teaching experience prescribed under the Special Rules in force for promotion to the post of Professor (in the Department of Prasuti Tantra and Striroga) has to be read along with the provisions of Rule 10 (ab) of Part II Kerala State & Subordinate Service Rules (KS & SSR) and thereby, it observed that teaching experience can only be one that is gained after the acquisition of the essential qualification.

Division Bench consisting of Justice A K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Mohammed Nias C P observed that,

"When we read the provisions in the Special Rules along with Rule 10 (ab) of Part II KS & SSR, as the Tribunal did in the instant case, the conclusion is inescapable that the teaching experience of ten years mentioned for the post of Professor is one that has to be gained after obtaining the basic PG qualification required for the post".

Kerala High Court Deprecates 'Clever Attempts' Made By Qualified Persons To Establish Less Income In Maintenance Proceedings

Case Title: Amaldev v. Preeja & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 659

The Kerala High Court on Monday deprecated attempts made by qualified persons to establish less income by producing salary certificates issued from private entrepreneurs, without opportunity to the other side to cross-examine the author of the document, in order to avoid paying maintenance to wife and children.

The Single Judge Bench of Justice A. Badharudeen observed that courts shall consider the entire evidence, the professional or other qualifications, otherwise the physical condition and all other attenuating circumstances of the husband/respondent, while quantifying the maintenance allowance.

"Clever attempts of qualified persons to establish less income by producing salary certificates issued from private entrepreneurs, without opportunity to the other side to cross-examine the author of the document to test its genesis, shall not be the sole basis of considering the income of the husband/respondent in a maintenance petition and such certificates alone shall not be decisive in determining the income also. The courts shall consider the entire evidence, the professional or other qualifications, otherwise the physical condition and all other attenuating circumstances of the husband/respondent, while quantifying the maintenance allowance".

Can't Stick On Technicalities Like Cut-Off Dates To Refuse Benefits: Kerala HC Asks State To Write Off Loans Taken For Endosulfan Victim's Treatment

Case Title: Ressy Mol Babu & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 660

The Kerala High Court recently directed the State Government to consider the debts incurred by the family of an endosulfan victim as debts qualified for waiver under Debt Waiver Scheme for Endosulfan Victims, and to write off the loans immediately. The direction comes after State refused to write off loans on the ground that the concerned GO for writing off loans up to Rs.3 Lakhs was applicable only to loans availed upto 30.06.2011.

Justice V.G. Arun observed, "Neither the State nor this Court can pretend to be oblivious of the plight of the endosulfan victims and their families in Kasaragod. It is pertinent to note that the NHRC recommended to pay Rs.5 Lakhs as compensation to victims like Ann Mariya. The Commission has also recommended to increase the quantum of relief and rehabilitation to victims and their families. Of course, the State came out with relief and rehabilitation packages. The daunting question is whether, in a case of this nature, the State and its officers can stick on technicalities like cut off dates for refusing the benefits due to the family of a victim".

Section 125 CrPC | Maintenance Must Be Granted From Date Of Filing Of Petition: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Sreeja T. & Ors. v. Rajaprabha

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 661

The Kerala High Court recently held that a petitioner under Section 125 CrPC must be granted maintenance from the date of filing of petition and not just date of passing of order.

Expressing shock at a Family Court's decision of granting maintenance from the date of order and not from the date of filing of petition, Justice A. Badharudeen said any deviation must come with reasons recorded in the order.

"...when a party claims allowance of maintenance by filing a petition, the party must get the maintenance from the date of the petition onwards and the same is the sanction of law. No doubt, deviation therefrom can be had for specified reasons to be recorded in writing and not otherwise. In the order impugned, the learned Family Court Judge not stated any reasons to deny maintenance from the date of petition and to grant the same from the date of order. Before this Court also nothing available to disallow maintenance from the date of the petition. In fact, there is no justifiable reason to uphold the said finding. To the contrary, it is held that the denial of maintenance allowance from the date of the petition without recording specific reasons is not the sanction of law and therefore, the said order is liable to be set aside..."

'In Ideal Society, Girls & Women Must Be Able To Walk On Streets At Any Point Of Time': Kerala High Court

Case Title: Fiona Joseph v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 662

The Kerala High Court on Thursday said that in an ideal society, girls and women must be able to walk on the streets at any point of time, be that day or night. However, it said such an atmosphere will require the security systems to be as advanced.

Observing that concerns of parents could not brushed aside just because the children had attained age of majority, Justice Devan Ramachandran said it is also necessary that the children grow up without being under the cloak of patriarchy.

"Our children have the right to experience life in all its vicissitudes and manifestations, and cannot be locked up or secluded even on the ground of offering them protection. It is the ... duty of the society to offer the protection, and to make our streets and public spaces safe, be that day or night. The petitioners have been constrained to approach this court because somewhere along the line, the society has not yet been able to offer them such. Since this is not an ideal world, certainly, concerns of protection and requirements of security would certainly have to be given the primacy that it requires, however, without boxing in our girls, and making them feel that they require a man to protect them. They certainly have to be made ready for the world, and as they say, even though we may not be able to prepare the future for our youth, we can prepare our youth for the future," it observed.

Form ICC For Sexual Harassment Complaints In All Colleges : Kerala High Court

Case Title: Fiona Joseph v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 662

The Kerala High Court on Thursday directed the competent authorities of colleges and other statutory authorities to constitute an Internal Complaints Committee under the UGC (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal of Sexual Harassment of Women Employees and Students in Higher Educational Institutions) Regulations, in every college in the State.

Justice Devan Ramachandran passed the above order while disposing the petitions challenging the notification issued by the Higher Education Department barring female students from going out of the Hostel after 9.30 PM.

It directed that the same shall be done within 2 months from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. "....I direct the competent authorities of colleges and such other statutory authorities to ensure that the Internal Committee in terms of the UGC Regulations Against Sexual Harassment is constituted in every college and notifications to that effect is constituted and published within 2 months from the date of receipt of copy of judgment. As far as UGC Regulations on Implementation of Promotion of Equity in Higher Educational Institutions is concerned, the guidelines therein shall also be fully implemented in all colleges and they shall be ensured by the supervising authorities without fail", it was observed.

Kerala High Court Allows 17-Year-Old Minor To Donate Liver For Her Father; Says "Blessed Are Parents Who Have Children Like Her"

Case Title: Devananda P P v. Department of Health and Family Welfare and Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 663

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday granted permission to a 17-year-old minor girl to donate a portion of her liver for conducting her father's transplantation surgery, subject to the other requirements of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994 and the Rules.

Justice V G Arun while passing the order said that it is heartening to note that the unrelenting fight put up by Devananda has finally succeeded.

"I applaud the petitioner's fight to save her father's life. Blessed are parents who have children like Devananda...The writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to donate a portion of her liver for conducting her father's transplantation surgery, subject to the other requirements of the Act and the Rules".

Kerala High Court Says Chief Judicial Magistrate May Have Forged Evidence In Trial, Orders Lakshadweep Administrator To Suspend Him Pending Enquiry

Case Title: Mohammed Nazer M.P. & Ors. v. Union Territory of Lakshadweep & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 664

The Kerala High Court on Friday said that former Chief Judicial Magistrate at Amini island in Lakshadweep seems to have forged evidence in a criminal trial and is liable to be proceeded against under law.

Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan directed Lakshadweep Administrator to place K. Cheriyakoya, who is currently working as Secretary of the District Legal Services Authority, under suspension forthwith and conduct a detailed enquiry into his actions.

"Even if a person is occupying the post of Magistrate or Judge, the law of the land is applicable to all. If there is any dereliction of duty, the constitutional courts should step in to strengthen the trust of the people in the judiciary. The Magistrate, Judges and other presiding officers are not above the law and if they commit any dereliction of duty, they have to face the consequences. This should be a lesson to all," said the court

Right To Be Forgotten - Kerala High Court Allows Litigants To Seek Deletion Of Personal Identities In Family Cases & In-Camera Trials

Case Title: Vysakh K.G. v. Union of India & Anr. And Other Connected Cases

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 665

Pronouncing a significant verdict on the "right to be forgotten", the Kerala High Court on Thursday held that personal information of the parties may not be published on the High Court website in respect of the family and matrimonial cases if the parties in those cases make such a request.

While holding that the claim for protection of personal information based on right to privacy cannot coexist in open court justice system, the Court however permitted the masking of personal identities in matrimonial cases and in cases where the law does not recognize the open court system (cases for rape and sexual offences where the trial is held in-camera).

The Division Bench comprising Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen, said, "In family and matrimonial cases arising in family court and jurisdictions otherwise, and also in other cases where the law does not recognize open court system, the registry of the Court shall not publish personal information of the parties or shall not allow any form of publication containing the identities of parties in the website or any other information system maintained by the Court if the parties to such litigations so insist".

Right To Be Forgotten | Kerala High Court Says Legislature Alone Competent To Enumerate Grounds But Till Then Courts Can Decide On Case-To-Case Basis

Case Title: Vysakh K.G. v. Union of India & Anr. and other connected cases

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 665

Observing that legislature alone is competent to enumerate grounds for claiming right to be forgotten and carve out exceptions to the claims of such a right, the Kerala High Court on Thursday said in the absence of legislation, the court may have to recognise the right and direct removal of such content available online on a case-to-case basis.

The division bench Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen, therefore took the view that the court cannot prevent the dissemination of case details in the public domain citing the privacy of individual litigants.

"In individual cases, the Court may, after adverting to time and space, order the erasure of past records. However, nothing prevents the Legislature from bringing in Legislation recognizing the right to be forgotten to erase such records after the expiry of such period as it deems fit to fix. Further, laying down the grounds when such a right to be forgotten can be exercised is the prerogative of the Legislature. As the right to be forgotten is not an absolute right, it is crucial that the legislature enumerates the grounds when an individual can claim this right," the Court observed.

Reporting And Publishing Of Judgments Part Of Freedom Of Speech And Expression, Cannot Be Taken Away Lightly: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Vysakh K.G. v. Union of India & Anr. And Other Connected Cases

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 665

The Kerala High Court on Friday ruled that reporting and publishing of judgments are part of freedom of speech and expression.

Dealing with petitions seeking enforcement of the 'right to be forgotten' against uploading of court orders or judgements on the internet, the division bench of Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen said: "The Courtroom is open to all. The Court cannot gloss over the protection available to publishers of judgments under Article 19(1)(a) of our Constitution. Reporting and publishing judgments are part of freedom of speech and expression and that cannot be taken away lightly without the aid of law."

The Court said the identity of the judiciary based on public confidence is not ordinarily possible without there being free flow of information on judicial functioning.

Section 294 IPC | Doctor's Consultation Room Not A 'Public Place': Kerala High Court Quashes Case Against Paediatrician

Case Title: Dr. K.K. Ramachandran v. Sub Inspector of Police & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 666

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday held that the consultation room of a doctor in a hospital is not a 'public place' in terms of Section 294(b) of IPC, while quashing a case of harassment against a doctor. The police had booked the doctor under Section 294(b) and Section 354A of the IPC.

Justice Kauser Edappagath observed that Section 294(b) of IPC is attracted when the offender sings, recites or utters any obscene song or word in or near any public place, to the annoyance of others. "If the act is not obscene, or is not done in any public place, or the song recited or uttered is not in or near any public place or that it caused no annoyance to others, no offence is committed," said the court.

It further noted that the place of occurrence was the consulting room of the doctor at a hospital.

"It can never be termed as a public place or near public place. That apart, in order to satisfy the definition of obscenity to attract Section 294(b) of IPC, the words uttered must be capable of arousing sexually impure thoughts in the minds of its hearers. There is no case for the prosecution that the words allegedly uttered by the petitioner aroused sexually impure thoughts in the minds of the hearers. In these circumstances, I am of the view that the basic ingredients of Section 294(b) of IPC are not attracted," said the court.

Kerala High Court Upholds Grant Of Maintenance To Wife Who Voluntarily Left Husband, Failed To Prove Cruelty Charge Against Him

Case Title: Arun v. Reshma

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 667

The Kerala High Court recently observed the wife not being able to lead a peaceful life in matrimonial home, in view of the particular circumstances there, may not always be 'cruelty' but could be a reasonable ground to deny 'joint residence' and same does not grant the husband any discretion to deny payment of maintenance.

Justice A. Badharudeen, while dealing with an argument that wife may not be legally entitled to get maintenance from husband after leaving matrimonial home voluntarily, said:

"... when a party seeks divorce on the ground of cruelty, there shall be sufficient pleadings alleging cruelty, and evidence to prove the cruelty, to succeed in the divorce petition. But difference of opinion otherwise, in view of the particular circumstances at the matrimonial home, whereby the wife could not lead a peaceful life time, shall not, always be 'cruelty', but these are also reasonable grounds to deny joint residence. In such cases, it could not be held that there was willful discretion to deny payment of maintenance".

Kerala High Court Quashes Proceedings Against Parle In Case Alleging Violation Of Legal Metrology Rules

Case Title: M/S Parle Agro Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v. Senior Inspector & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 668

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday, while dealing with a petition filed by M/S Parle Agro Pvt. Ltd. seeking quashing of criminal proceedings initiated against it for not displaying the retail sale price printed on the 'principal display panel' on its FROOTI bottle, but printed on the neck of the bottle, held that same was not violative of the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011. The instant case arose in the year 2014, while the amendment to the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 and Rules thereunder were enacted in 2017. The Court therefore discerned that the Rules as in force on the date of incident would alone be applicable herein.

While noting so, Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas observed that: "As per rule 8(1), every declaration ought to appear on the principal display panel. However, Rule 2(h) defines the principal display panel as the total surface area of the package. An option is also given to the manufacturer to print all the information (both pre-printed and online) either grouped together at one place on the principal display panel, or the pre-printed information grouped together and given at one place and the online information grouped together and given at another place of the principal display panel. In the instant case, the pre-printed information is given on the wrapper encircling the bottle, while the online information, though grouped together, is printed on the neck of the bottle".