Kerala High Court Weekly Round Up: July 4 - July 10, 2022
Athira Prasad
10 July 2022 3:00 PM IST
Nominal Index [Citations 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 320-339]1. Vasu Kallayi v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 3202. Cheshire Tarzan v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 3213. State of Kerala v. XXX 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 3224. XXX v. State Of Kerala & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 3235. Sathy & Ors v. Dileep I.S & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 3246. Ansar Najeeb & Ors v....
Nominal Index [Citations 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 320-339]
1. Vasu Kallayi v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 320
2. Cheshire Tarzan v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 321
3. State of Kerala v. XXX 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 322
4. XXX v. State Of Kerala & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 323
5. Sathy & Ors v. Dileep I.S & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 324
6. Ansar Najeeb & Ors v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 325
7. Akhil P.S v. Director General of Police & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 326
8. State of Kerala & Anr v. Dr. K. Mohamed Akbar & Ors. and connected matters 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 327
9. Bijoy v. Gopinathan & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 328
10. Jibin Joseph v. Union Territory of Lakshadweep & Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 329
11. State of Kerala v. DR.JOHN PANICKER 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 330
12. Faizal Kulappadam @ Faizal N v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 331
13. C Abdul Aziz & Ors. v Chembukandy Safiya & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 332
14. Akhil M v. Union of India & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 333
15. Binoy Kurian v. Varkey Joseph 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 334
16. Navaneeth N Nath v State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 335
17. University of Calicut v. Mohamed Sajid T & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 336
18. Thomas v. R. Murugasamy 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 337
19. Inspector General of Registration & Anr v. Riyasudheen K & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 338
20. Cochin University of Science and Technology v. Dr P. V. Sasikumar 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 339
Judgments This Week:
Case Title: Vasu Kallayi v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 320
The Kerala High Court recently observed that the primary cause of cases stockpiling under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 was the ignorance of law and its developments through judicial decisions. Justice P.V Kunhikrishnan thereby set aside orders passed by the Local Level Monitoring Committee and by the Revenue Division Officer, citing unsustainability under the law, while calling the petition a classic example of such ignorance.
Case Title: Cheshire Tarzan v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 321
The Kerala High Court has directed the Union Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution to pass an appropriate order on the issue of deliberate dereliction of duty by the Inspector Station House Officer, in obeying the mandates of the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950. A Division Bench of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly noted that the matter was pending consideration before Ministry, before directing the respondents to reach a logical conclusion on the matter without delay.
Case Title: State of Kerala v. XXX
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 322
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday allowed a petition moved by the Crime Branch challenging the order of the Ernakulam Additional Special Sessions Court which rejected its petition to forward the memory card allegedly containing the visuals of the crime in the 2017 actor sexual assault case for forensic examination. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas accordingly set aside the trial court's order finding that the prosecution only wanted to ascertain certain details that it assumes to be of relevance in the investigation, and not initiate any action.
Case Title: XXX v. State Of Kerala & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 323
The Kerala High Court last week observed that the delay in reporting sexual offences should not be viewed as strictly as in other offences and that it would only become fatal in a case where the authenticity of the prosecution version is uncertain. Justice Kauser Edappagath remarked that this was so because, in a traditional society like ours, it was not reasonable to disbelieve the incident merely because there was a delay in filing the complaint.
Case Title: Sathy & Ors v. Dileep I.S & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 324
The Kerala High Court on Friday while allowing an original petition, held that the limitation period for filing motor accident claims as per Section 166(3), which was introduced by Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act 2019, only has a prospective effect. Justice Amit Rawal remarked that otherwise, with the stroke of the amendment, the right available to the injured and the claimants of the deceased person would be taken away.
Kerala High Court Grants Bail To 31 Persons Accused Of Raising Provocative Slogans During PFI Rally
Case Title: Ansar Najeeb & Ors v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 325
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday granted bail to 31 accused arrested for allegedly raising provocative slogans to destroy communal harmony and criminally intimidating large sections of the society by threatening to annihilate certain groups in a recent rally conducted by the Popular Front of India (PFI) in Alappuzha. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, while allowing the bail application, observed that the investigation was almost complete and that they had been in detention for over a month and the continued detention of the petitioners will not serve any further purpose, despite two accused remaining at large.
Case Title: Akhil P.S v. Director General of Police & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 326
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday granted emergency leave to a man undergoing imprisonment to attend the religious rites following his brother's death under special circumstances since he was not permitted to attend the funeral. Justice Ziyad Rahman A. A observed that although Rule 400(1)(i) of Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Rules only extends the benefit of emergency leave to attend a funeral ceremony and not for religious rites, the facts and circumstances of the case entitled the convict to emergency leave.
Case Title: State of Kerala & Anr v. Dr. K. Mohamed Akbar & Ors. and connected matters
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 327
The Kerala High Court on Monday set aside the order of the State Administrative Tribunal that directed the State government to enhance the retirement age of doctors in the AYUSH department to 60 years as done for doctors in the Health Department, citing that this was a state policy. A Division Bench of Justice A.K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P thereby directed the State to take a decision on the same expeditiously.
CPC | Counter Claim In A Suit Need Not Be Headed By Cause Title: Kerala High Court
Case Title: Bijoy v. Gopinathan & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 328
The Kerala High Court recently held that there is no stipulation under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) or the Civil Rules of Practice of the State that counter-claims should be headed by a cause title. Justice C.S Dias held so after examining Order VII Rule 1 and Order VIII Rule 6A of CPC and Rules 11 and 15 of the Civil Rules.
Case Title: Jibin Joseph v. Union Territory of Lakshadweep & Anr.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 329
The Kerala High Court recently ruled that a Magistrate Court is bound to apply its mind while exercising the powers conferred to it under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Justice Kauser Edappagath stated that while taking cognizance of offences or ordering an investigation into any cognizable case, courts should not merely forward all complaints they receive like a post office. As such, it was emphasised that the powers under Section 156(3) cannot be exercised casually or mechanically but are required to be exercised judiciously.
Case Title: State of Kerala v. DR.JOHN PANICKER
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 330
The Kerala High Court has opined that the power of the government to make or amend laws determining the service conditions of its employees cannot confer them the power to apply such laws differently to similarly situated persons. The Division Bench of Justice Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias CP observed that allowing the government to do so would be violative of all cannons of equality enshrined in the Constitution of India.
Case Title: Faizal Kulappadam @ Faizal N v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 331
The Kerala High Court on Monday directed the Education Department to install drop boxes in all schools in the State for students to submit their grievances and concerns anonymously. A Division Bench of Chief Justice S Manikumar and Justice Shaji P Chaly issued the order finding that circulars issued by the government in this regard had not been implemented in all schools.
Case Title: C Abdul Aziz & Ors. v Chembukandy Safiya & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 332
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday observed that a partition deed executed by a Muslim mother on behalf of her minor children acting as their guardian is not valid going by the precedents of the Supreme Court. The Division Bench of Justice P. B Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S Sudha observed that while there was nothing in the personal law prohibiting the same, it was bound by the precedents of the Supreme Court which have established that the Muslim mother cannot be the guardian of her minor child's person or property except for movable property.
Case Title: Akhil M v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 333
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday refused to interfere with the transfer order of a CISFofficial of the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (BPCL) citing that it was made for administrative reasons. Justice Anu Sivaraman added that it would not be justified to interfere with the same particularly since it was the transfer of a member of a uniformed service when there were no sustainable malafides.
Case Title: Binoy Kurian v. Varkey Joseph
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 334
The Kerala High Court recently, while disposing of two petitions, held that the exemption provided under Section 60(1)(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure is not applicable to a charge decree or decree where there is a statutory charge, over the property. Justice A Badharudeen further opined that there is no reason to differentiate between a charge decree and a decree where a statutory charge is created while considering exemption provided under Section 60(1)(c).
Case Title: Navaneeth N Nath v State of Kerala
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 335
While granting bail to a Central Government Counsel in a sexual assault case, the Kerala High Court held that a subsequent refusal to marry or a failure to lead the relationship into a marriage is not sufficient to constitute the offence of rape even if the partners had indulged in a physical relationship. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas observed that a sexual relationship between two willing adult partners will not amount to rape coming within the purview of section 376 of the IPC unless the consent for sex was obtained by a fraudulent act or misrepresentation.
Also Read: Kerala High Court Allows Bail Plea Moved By CGC Accused Of Sexually Assaulting Colleague
Case Title: University of Calicut v. Mohamed Sajid T & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 336
The Kerala High Court on Thursday held that an employee at the helm of affairs, accused of embezzling money, cannot be reinstated during the pendency of the enquiry and thereby refused to recall the order of suspension. A Division Bench of Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S Sudha added that whether these accusations were baseless or genuine was a matter of enquiry and for that reason, the disciplinary proceedings had to continue uninterrupted without the court's interference.
Case Title: Thomas v. R. Murugasamy
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 337
The Kerala High Court on Thursday, while allowing a motor accident claims appeal, held that in Motor Accident Claims the claimant is entitled to get compensation for 'actual damages', which includes the value of spare parts as well. Justice Badharudeen opined that the claimant is entitled to compensation for the value of spare parts incurred for repairing the vehicle which got damaged as a consequence of the motor accident.
Case Title: Inspector General of Registration & Anr v. Riyasudheen K & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 338
The Kerala High Court recently held that a private organisation cannot use the name of a State in its title, irrespective of the profit or purpose for which it is constituted, even if it is a non-commercial organisation going by the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950 and the corresponding Rules. A Division Bench of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly clarified that the use of name of a particular State is prohibited not only for the purpose of trade or business but also for calling or profession.
Payment Of Gratuity Act| Teachers Come Within The Preview of 'Employee' U/S 2(e): Kerala High Court
Case Title: Cochin University of Science and Technology v. Dr P. V. Sasikumar
Citatiton: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 339
The Kerala High Court on Monday while dismissing a petition held that teachers come within the preview of 'employee' as defined under the Payment of Gratuity Act. Justice Murali Purushothaman further clarified that CUSAT, being an educational institution, is an establishment under section 1(3)(c) of the Act.
Other Developments:
'Approach AFT' : Kerala High Court Refuses To Entertain Plea Challenging Agnipath Scheme
Case Title: Abymon Varghese & Ors v. Union of India & Ors.
23 candidates who have cleared the physical and medical tests for the Indian Army in 2021 have approached the Kerala High Court against the Centre's Agnipath recruitment scheme for armed forces. However, a Division Bench of Justice A.K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohmmed Nias C.P disposed of the petition as not maintainable suggesting that the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) is the appropriate forum to decide the challenge.
Can CLAT-PG Test Ranking Be Used To Select NTPC Law Officers? Kerala High Court Reserves Judgment
Case Title: NTPC v. Aishwarya Mohan
The Kerala High Court on Monday heard the appeals filed against the decision of a Single Judge, which held that the condition mandating applicants to clear CLAT for applying for the post of Assistant Law Officer in the National Thermal Power Corporation Limited (NTPC) was violative of Article 16 of the Constitution of India. The appeals, moved by the NTPC and the writ petitioner respectively, were heard by a Division Bench of Justice A. K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P.
Bail Granted To PC George In Sexual Assault Case Challenged Before Kerala High Court
A prime accused in the solar panel scam has moved the Kerala High Court challenging the bail granted to former MLA PC George in the sexual harassment case. PC George was arrested by the Cantonment Police from Thiruvananthapuram on Saturday based on a complaint alleging that he sexually harassed the accused in the solar panel case at a guest house. Upon reaching the guest house, it is alleged that George advanced certain unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures to the de facto complainant.
Case Title: Suo Motu v. State of Kerala & Ors.
While adjudicating upon a suo motu case regarding the increasing number of road accidents, the Kerala High Court on Monday asked the State government to file a report on the incident where a tourist bus caught fire after firecrackers were set off on its roof before venturing on a college excursion last month. A Division Bench of Justice Anil K Narendran and Justice P.G Ajith Kumar listed the matter urgently after a news report of the incident caught its eye. The Court also condemned the continued flouting of road safety regulations despite repeated orders for their strict implementation.
Actor Sreejith Ravi Moves Kerala High Court Seeking Bail In POCSO Case
Malayalam actor Sreejith Ravi has approached the Kerala High Court seeking bail in a POCSO case registered against him for allegedly exhibiting nudity in front of children. The prosecution case is that on July 4, the applicant flashed his private parts and proceeded to exhibit and caress the same in front of two girls at a park. The Thrissur West Police registered a case and arrested the actor after the girls, aged 9 and 14 respectively, filed a complaint on the same.
Case Title: Navaneeth N Nath v State of Kerala
The Kerala High Court on Thursday orally observed that rape charges will not be attracted against a man merely because the relationship between him and a woman turned sour over time while reserving its verdict in the bail application moved by a Central Government Counsel in a sexual assault case. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas remarked that the relationships have evolved over time and that young adults these days have a different outlook on romantic relationships but that the fact that the relationship did not work out will not attract the offence of rape.
The Kerala High Court on Thursday pulled up the Kochi Corporation and the Public Works Department over their failure to take adequate action for repairing the faulty roads in the city even after delivering repeated directions. Justice Devan Ramachandran observed that most of the roads in the city were destroyed after rainfall and that some action had to be taken to repair these faulty roads.
A day ahead of the scheduled release of Prithviraj-starrer Malayalam movie 'Kaduva', the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) has demanded that the name of the protagonist character be modified after it was found relatable to a real person. The CBFC has also directed the insertion of a strong disclaimer at the beginning of the movie to mitigate defamation. This comes a week after the Kerala High Court directed the CBFC to take an independent decision on the objection filed before it which challenged the theatre release of the movie.
