Kerala High Court Weekly Round Up: April 18 To April 24 2022

Nominal Index [Citations: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 181 - 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 191]

Muhammed Hasheer Poolakkal v. United Arab Bank & Anr, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 181

Reji K. Joshy & Ors. v. Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 182

Joseph v. State of Kerala, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 183

 P. Gopalakrishnan @ Dileep & Ors v. State of Kerala & Anr., 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 184

T.N. Suraj v. State of Kerala & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 185

T.N. Suraj v. State of Kerala & Ors.,  2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 186

M/s Bativala and Karani v. K.I. Johny & Anr., 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 187

Deepa Srinivasan & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 188

 Suo Motu v. Travancore Devaswom Board, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 189

 Suo Motu v. State of Kerala & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 190

Suresh George v. Kochi Metro Rail Ltd & Ors.,  2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 191

Judgments This Week: 

1. Private Parties Can't Approach Courts Seeking Attachment Of Properties In Foreign States Under Chapter VIIA CrPC : Kerala High Court

Case Title: Muhammed Hasheer Poolakkal v. United Arab Bank & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 181

The High Court has held that the courts in India cannot entertain any request directly from any private parties or institutions to initiate proceedings for attachment of properties in foreign states and added that such requests can only be made by the Centre or appropriate authorities under Section 105 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Upon examining the legislative intent behind incorporating Chapter VIIA of CrPC, Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A took the stand that permitting any individual or establishment to file an application would amount to reading into the provision something which was never intended to be contemplated therein.

2. Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules| No Opportunity Of Hearing U/R 66(5) Before Registrar Accepts Report: HC Full Bench Upholds Precedent

Case Title: Reji K. Joshy & Ors. v. Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 182

The High Court has upheld the position established by its Division Bench in 2010 by agreeing that Rule 66 (5) of the does not contemplate any opportunity being given by the Registrar before accepting any report or initiating any action based on the report. A Full Bench of Justice P.B Suresh Kumar, Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan and Justice C.S. Sudha thereby upheld the law as found in State of Kerala v. Aravindakshan Nair [2010 (3) KLT 11] while adjudicating upon a reference made by the Division Bench doubting the correctness of the proposition of law laid down in the impugned decision.

3. DYFI Muslim Leader Marries Christian Woman, Ignites Political Row: Kerala HC Disposes Habeas Moved By Her Father Alleging Love Jihad

Case Title: Joseph v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 183

The High Court disposed of a habeas corpus plea moved by the father of a Christian woman Jyotsna Mary Joseph, who married a Muslim DYFI region secretary Shejin. The father had claimed that his daughter was taken away against her will and was kept in illegal detention while raising 'love jihad' allegations in the matter. A Division Bench of Justice V.G. Arun and Justice C.S Sudha decided to dispose of the petition after hearing the woman who confirmed that she was not illegally detained and that she had taken the decision voluntarily. 

4. Kerala High Court Dismisses Dileep's Plea To Quash FIR In Murder Conspiracy Case

Case Title: P. Gopalakrishnan @ Dileep & Ors v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 184

The Court dismissed the plea moved by Dileep to quash the FIR filed by the Crime Branch of Kerala Police against him and five others for conspiring to murder the investigation officials in the 2017 actor rape case, in which Dileep is facing trial as the chief conspirator. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A opined that even if what is revealed from the allegations is a doubtful case for making out the offences at the stage of FIR, the benefit of the doubt should go in favour of the investigation and not to the accused because interference in the investigation at this stage would foreclose all opportunities for the police to collect materials in support of the allegations.

Also Read: Allegations Against Dileep Prima Facie Suggest Intention To Harm Police Officers : Kerala High Court

5. Kerala High Court Passes Ex-Parte Interim Order Against ReporterTV On Reports Against Dileep's Brother-In-Law

Case Title: T.N. Suraj v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 185

The Court issued an interim ex-parte gag order against Reporter TV restricting it from publishing, broadcasting or telecasting any item concerning or relating to actor Dileep's brother in law, Suraj while reporting about the murder conspiracy case or the 2017 actor sexual assault case for the next three weeks. Suraj had moved the Court alleging that the respondent channel was subjecting him to a media trial and resorting to sensationalism and publication of fabricated allegations against the accused and their associates in the said cases. In his plea, he had sought an injunction to restrain the media from reporting court proceedings.

6. Media Can't Make Suggestions Of Guilt Or Innocence Of A Person Or Credibility Of Witnesses: Kerala High Court

Case Title: T.N. Suraj v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 186

While temporarily gagging Reporter TV from publishing/broadcasting/telecasting any item concerning or relating to actor Dileep's brother in law, Suraj on the murder conspiracy case or the 2017 actor sexual assault case, the Court commented on the detrimental effect media trial has on the legal system. Justice Mohammed Nias C.P remarked that media trials influence public opinion and that they could often lead to loss of faith in the justice delivery system.

7. Res Judicata Not Applicable To Subsequent Arbitral Proceedings If First Award Was Set Aside Due To Incompetence Of Tribunal: Kerala High Court

Case Title: M/s Bativala and Karani v. K.I. Johny & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 187

The Court has held that there is no legal impediment for arbitrating parties to initiate fresh proceedings if the district court sets aside an award on any issue not yet concluded in that award. This implies that the principles of res judicata will have only a limited application in such proceedings under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. A Division Bench of Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S Sudha observed that even if the earlier award was one set aside not on any ground affecting the competency of the Tribunal, the subsequent arbitral proceedings are not hit by the principles of res judicata. 

8. Kerala High Court Permits Couple To Proceed With Non-Commercial Surrogacy

Case Title: Deepa Srinivasan & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 188

The Court came to the rescue of a couple who had approached the Court with a plea seeking permission to a private hospital to facilitate non-commercial and altruistic surrogacy for them. Upon noticing that all necessary precautions were taken by all the concerned parties, Justice N. Nagaresh permitted the couple to proceed with surrogacy while clarifying that further directions are to be given in the case, pending the writ petition. Therefore, the matter will be taken up again on 23 May.

9. Kerala High Court Asks Travancore Devaswom Board To Take Over Sabarimala Virtual Queue Services

Case Title: Suo Motu v. Travancore Devaswom Board

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 189

The High Court ruled that the control over the virtual queue system for Sabarimala darshan should be transferred from the Kerala Police to the Travancore Devaswom Board. A Division Bench comprising Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice P.G Ajithkumar delivered its verdict in a suo motu case and two petitioners, including one Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the legality of the Pilgrim Management System, implemented by the Kerala Police.

10. Substandard Pooja Items Sold In Temple Premises: Kerala High Court Says Temple Advisory Committee Bound To Keep Constant Vigil

Case Title: Suo Motu v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 190

The Court held that the Temple Advisory Committee constituted under Section 31A of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act is bound to keep constant vigil over the sale of vazhipadu (pooja items) in the stalls on the temple premises, to ensure that the Kuthaka holder (successful bidder) is not selling any substandard pooja items to devotees. A Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice P.G Ajithkumar held that a ritual or pooja in the temple has to be performed by using pure pooja items while disposing of a suo motu matter initiated based on a news item that reported serious irregularities in the sale of Vazhipadu items in Vaikom Sree Mahadeva Temple, particularly in the sale of 'Koovalamala'.

11. Illegal Appointment Will Not Get Legitimised By Efflux Of Time: Kerala High Court Annuls Appointment Of Kochi Metro General Manager

Case Title: Suresh George v. Kochi Metro Rail Ltd & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 191

The High Court has annulled the appointment of Nireesh C, the General Manager of Kochi Metro Rail Limited (KMRL), (marketing, alternative revenue and corporate communications) upon finding that he fell short of the minimum age limit fixed for the post when he was appointed. Justice V.G. Arun annulled the appointment holding that an illegal appointment will not get legitimised by the passage of time and that the Court cannot evade its duty merely because there was a delay in pointing out the illegality.

Other Significant Developments

12. [Bulk Diesel Prices] Maintainability Issue Not Considered: Oil Companies Argue Before Kerala HC In Appeals Against Interim Order In Favour Of KSRTC

Case Title: Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

The Court heard the State-owned oil marketing companies in the appeals challenging the interim order issued in favour of Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) wherein the OMCs have been directed to levy the price of High Speed Diesel (HSD) at par with the price available at retail pumps temporarily. A vacation bench of Justice V.G. Arun and Justice C.S Sudha will continue hearing the appeals on Tuesday after recording KSRTC's submission that a contempt petition will not be filed during court vacation.

Also Read: Oil Companies Move Appeals Assailing Interim Order In Favour Of KSRTC

13. Actor Assault Case| Kerala High Grants One More Month For Prosecution To Wind Up Further Investigation

Case Title: P. Gopalakrishnan alias Dileep v. State of Kerala & Anr.

The Court granted one more month's time to the prosecution to conclude the further investigation in the 2017 sexual assault case. Justice Kauser Edappagath granted this extension after noting that the pendrive submitted by the prosecution earlier this month contained two folders containing three voice clips each which were apparently collected by the investigating officers during the course of further investigation and which required careful analysis.

14. In A Rare Move, Kerala High Court Examines Witness At Appeal Stage Allowing NIA's Plea

Case Title: M.H. Faisal v. State of Kerala 

In an extraordinary step, the Court allowed witness examination before the Court at the appellate stage. The development happened in the Kashmir terror recruitment case. Generally, witness examinations in criminal appeals are completed at the trial courts and the High Courts only evaluate the evidence gathered by the trial court. While considering appeals filed by the convicted accused and the National Investigation Agency (NIA) against an NIA court decision, the Division Bench of Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice C Jayachandran allowed the examination of a BSNL official who had issued a call record showing communication between the accused and some persons in Kashmir.

15. Kerala High Court Asks District Judge To Inspect & Submit Report On Trivandrum Mental Health Centre After Reports Claim Inhuman Conditions

Case Title: High Court Legal Aid Committee v. State of Kerala

The Court took notice of the concerns raised regarding the alleged alarming and inhuman condition of the patients in the Thiruvananthapuram Mental Health Centre. Justice Sathish Ninan has sought a report from the Thiruvananthapuram District Judge, who is also the Chairman of the Monitoring Committee of the Mental Health Centre in the district on the functioning of the said Centre.

16. Kerala High Court Notifies Guidelines For Recording Evidence Of Vulnerable Witnesses As Per Supreme Court's Direction

The High Court has issued certain Guidelines for Recording of Evidence of Vulnerable Witnesses in light of the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Smruti Tukaram Badade v. State Of Maharashtra & Anr. In an attempt to provide vulnerable witnesses with a safe and conducive environment to testify fearlessly during a criminal trial, the Court has directed setting up Vulnerable Witnesses Deposition Centres at all courts in the state.

17. 'Police Leaking Privileged Communication Between Advocate & Clients' : Lawyer's Complaint Before Bar Council

A lawyer has filed a complaint before the Bar Council of Kerala seeking appropriate legal action against the police officers who allegedly leaked privileged communication between lawyers and their clients in the cases involving actor Dileep. This is in light of the reports that suggest that calls between Senior Advocate B. Raman Pillai who represents the actor in most cases and Dileep's brother Anoop were leaked to the media.