Nominal Index [Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 787 - 813]South Indian Bank Ltd. and Anr. v. Rahim H K and Anr., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 787Anish Anand v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 788Shijo Mon Joseph v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 789Kerala State Medical Councils v Daleel Ahmmed and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 790Save A Family Plan (India) v. The Deputy Commissioner...
Nominal Index [Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 787 - 813]
South Indian Bank Ltd. and Anr. v. Rahim H K and Anr., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 787
Anish Anand v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 788
Shijo Mon Joseph v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 789
Kerala State Medical Councils v Daleel Ahmmed and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 790
Save A Family Plan (India) v. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 791
X v. Y, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 792
M/S Esthappan Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. v Reserve Bank of India and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 793
Tomon v. State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 794
S. Sreekumar v. State of Kerala and Anr. and S. Jayasree v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 795
Directorate of Enforcement v. State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 796
M/s Escapade Resorts Pvt. Ltd. v. The Commercial Tax Officer, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 797
N. Prakash v. The Cochin Devaswom Board, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 798
P.P. Paul v. Union of India, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 799
XXX v. District Legal Services Authority of Kottayam and Ors. , 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 800
Shiju R v. Sunil Kumar V. , 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 801
P.T. Vincent v. State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 802
M/S National Timbers v. Union of India, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 803
Raju K.K. v. State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 804
Shimwas Hussain v. The Addl./Joint Commissioner of Customs, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 805
Madhur Sree Madanantheswara Vinayaka Temple v. Income Tax Officer, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 806
Aspinwall and Company Limited v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 807
Thekkee Cherupillil Sarada v. Income Tax Officer, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 808
Rajeev K.P. v. Unais K.K., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 809
M/s K.V. Joshy & C.K. Paul v. The Assistant Commissioner, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 810
V.R. Sudheer v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 811
Jiostar India Private Limited (Formerly known as Star India Pvt Ltd) v. Competition Commission of India and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 812
Thilakeshwari @ Sheela Kurian v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 813
Judgments/ Orders This Week
Case Title: South Indian Bank Ltd. and Anr. v. Rahim H K and Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 787
The Kerala High Court has held that the High Court cannot invoke its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to reschedule payments to be made by a borrower under One Time Settlement (OTS).
A Division Bench comprising Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishna S. thus sett aside a Single Judge order that had granted borrowers the facility to clear loan arrears in instalments and restrained coercive recovery under the SARFAESI Act.
Case Title: Anish Anand v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 788
The Kerala High Court has reaffirmed that further investigation under Section 173 (8) CrPC must be conducted by the same agency that has conducted the original investigation and not a different agency.
Justice C. Pratheep Kumar was delivering the judgment in a writ petition filed by the accused in pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pathanamthitta.
Case Title: Shijo Mon Joseph v. State of Kerala and Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 789
The Kerala High Court recently clarified that a condition, which required furnishing of bank guarantee to get interim custody of a vehicle that was alleged to be caught transporting river sand from forest, is onerous.
Justice C.S. Dias observed that the Apex Court decision in Shihab etc. and another v. State of Kerala and another [2016 (4) KHC 183] holds the field when it comes to similar cases.
Case Title: Kerala State Medical Councils v Daleel Ahmmed and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 790
The Kerala High Court on Monday (1 December) upheld the requirement of clinical clerkship for Foreign Medical Graduates (FMGs) who faced a break in the course during the pandemic and joined the college and did a compensatory course.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice P.V. Balakrishnan held that the FMGs, who had completed medical courses in China during the COVID-19 pandemic, had not “sufficiently compensated” the period of online study as required by the National Medical Commission (NMC).
Case Title: Save A Family Plan (India) v. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 791
The Kerala High Court has held that a tribunal cannot travel beyond the grounds not cited by the commissioner while exercising jurisdiction under Section 263 Income Tax Act.
Justices A. Muhamed Mustaque and Harisankar V. Menon stated that only one reason was highlighted by the Commissioner for exercising the power under Section 263 of the Act and the Tribunal having found the said reason as not a valid one, the Tribunal should have stopped there rather than making further observations as regards the sustainability or otherwise of the extension of the benefits under Section 11 of the Act through the assessment order.
Case Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 792
The Kerala High Court has recently held that circumstantial evidence is sufficient to establish the factum of 'living in adultery' to defeat the claim for maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.
Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath, was delivering a judgment in a revision petition filed against the Family Court decision which had granted maintenance to a woman despite evidence produced by the husband alleging that she was “living in adultery.”
Case Title: M/S Esthappan Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. v Reserve Bank of India and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 793
The Kerala High Court has recently observed that when a party deliberately withholds certain claims or issues in one proceedings with the intention to raise them in a subsequent litigation disguised as a distinct or separate remedy or proceeding from the initial one, such subsequent litigation will fall under the 'Henderson Principle'.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishna S. dismissed an appeal preferred by M/s M.D. Esthappan Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. against SARFAESI proceedings initiated by Dhanlaxmi Bank.
Case Title: Tomon v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 794
The Kerala High Court has held that the absence of independent witnesses in cases arising under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code cannot, by itself, weaken the prosecution's case. The Court stressed that evidence from close relatives is not to be discarded merely because of their relationship with the victim.
Justice M.B. Snehalatha, was delivering the judgment in a criminal revision petition filed by the husband challenging the conviction and sentence against him for the offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC.
Sabarimala Gold Theft: Kerala High Court Denies Pre-Arrest Bail To Former Devaswom Board Officials
Case Title: S. Sreekumar v. State of Kerala and Anr. and S. Jayasree v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 795
The Kerala High Court on Thursday (December 4) denied pre-arrest bail to S. Sreekumar, the former Administrative Officer of the Travancore Devaswom Board, who is arraigned as the 6th accused in the high-profile Sabarimala gold theft case.
The Court also rejected the anticipatory bail plea of TDB's former Secretary, S. Jayasree, who stands arrayed as the 4th accused.
Justice A. Badharudeen passed the order today, dismissing the bail pleas.
Case Title: Directorate of Enforcement v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 796
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (December 03) set aside the Ranni Magistrate court's order denying the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) access to the First Information Report and First Information Statement before the Crime Branch in the Sabarimala gold theft case.
The Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar observed that in the ED's application before the Magistrate, there was no mention regarding "proceeds of crime", which was necessary to invoke jurisdiction under PMLA. Thus, the Court felt it appropriate that a fresh application be made.
Case Title: M/s Escapade Resorts Pvt. Ltd. v. The Commercial Tax Officer
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 797
The Kerala High Court has held that an Ayurvedic Treatment centre is to be classified as a 'hospital' and not 'hotel', and therefore, luxury tax cannot be imposed.
Justices A. Muhamed Mustaque and Harisankar V. Menon stated that the Ayurvedic Treatment Centre admits patients undergoing prescribed Ayurvedic treatment for a minimum duration, without offering hotel amenities, it qualifies as a hospital and luxury tax is not liable under the Luxury Tax Act.
Case Title: N. Prakash v. The Cochin Devaswom Board
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 798
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (03 November) directed the Cochin Devaswom Board (CDB) to refrain from engaging personnel wearing inappropriate attire, including T-shirts bearing the word “bouncer,” for security during temple festivals or within the temple precincts.
The division bench comprising Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar, delivered the judgment while disposing of a petition challenging the engagement of security personnel, wearing T-shirt with the word “bouncer”, to control devotees in the Sree Poornathrayeesa Temple, Thrippunithura, during the Temple Festival.
Case Title: P.P. Paul v. Union of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 799
The Kerala High Court held that payments made under Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme (SVLDRS) are valid if they fall within the extended limitation period granted by the Supreme Court during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. found that SVLDRS proceedings are quasi-judicial in nature, and hence covered under Supreme Court's suo moto extension orders.
Case Title: XXX v. District Legal Services Authority of Kottayam and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 800
The Kerala High Court recently directed the Kerala State Legal Services Authority (KeLSA) to disburse an amount of ₹5 lakhs as interim compensation to a victim of an acid attack to meet her urgent requirement for treatment.
The plea before Justice C. Pratheep Kumar was preferred by an acid attack victim, who was attacked by two persons in 2016 when she was getting down in front of her house from a car. She had suffered serious burn injuries on her face and lost sight of her left eye.
No 'Perversity': Kerala High Court Upholds Arbitral Award Dissolving 'Zephyr' Coaching Institute
Case Title: Shiju R v. Sunil Kumar V.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 801
The Kerala High Court on 28th November, 2025 dismissed an appeal sought to challenge an arbitral award that dissolved a coaching partnership firm, ruling that courts can neither re-examine expert valuations nor can the parties introduce fresh evidence at the appellate stage under section 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. held that “no case whatsoever under Section 34” was established to set aside the award passed in 2014 and affirmed by the District Court in 2016. Emphasising the limited scope of judicial interference, the Bench reiterated that the appellate power under Section 37 is “akin to that of superintendence”, confined merely to examining whether the court acted within its statutory limits.
Case Title: P.T. Vincent v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 802
The Kerala High Court held that once the plinth area of a building increases due to additional construction, a fresh building tax assessment must be carried out under the Kerala Building Tax Act.
Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A., after examining the documents produced by the assessee, stated that the assessee had carried out additional constructions after the initial construction, which was subjected to assessment under the Kerala Building Tax Act.
Case Title: M/S National Timbers v. Union of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 803
The Kerala High Court has held that a lower conversion factor is applicable for timber imports made before 11.05.2012.
Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. examined the issue regarding the refund of additional customs duty paid for the import of timber from Myanmar and other foreign countries.
Case Title: Raju K.K. v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 804
The Kerala High Court has held that there is no illegality in passing a detention order under Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (PITNDPS Act), even when the remedy of bail cancellation is available against the detenu.
A Division Bench comprising Dr. Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Jobin Sebastian were delivering a judgment in a writ petition filed against the detention order issued under Section 3(1) of PITNDPS Act.
Case Title: Shimwas Hussain v. The Addl./Joint Commissioner of Customs
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 805
The Kerala High Court has held that the classification of 'Nata de Coco' is a factual matter that must be decided by the adjudicating authority through statutory proceedings and not by the writ court.
Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. stated that since it is a statutory proceeding contemplated under Section 124 of the Act, which should be followed from the proceedings under Section 110 of the Act, the question as to be sustainability of the classification cannot be considered by this Court in writ jurisdiction. This is because the adjudication of the dispute involved, being a factual aspect, it has to be examined by the competent authorities, and this Court cannot conduct a parallel enquiry in connection with the same.
Case Title: Madhur Sree Madanantheswara Vinayaka Temple v. Income Tax Officer
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 806
The Kerala High Court has held that income derived from public religious/charitable trusts is not eligible for exemption under Section 10(23BBA) of the Income Tax Act.
Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. stated that income derived from properties belonging to the deity or temple does not become the income of the administrative body merely because the body manages the institution. The administrative body must independently establish that the income claimed is its own statutory income in order to attract the exemption under Section 10(23BBA) of the Income Tax Act.
Interest On Delayed Agricultural Income Tax Not Deductible U/S 37 Income Tax Act: Kerala High Court
Case Title: Aspinwall and Company Limited v. The Commissioner of Income Tax
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 807
The Kerala High Court has held that interest on delayed agricultural income tax is not deductible under Section 37 Income Tax Act.
Justices A. Muhamed Mustaque and Harisankar V. Menon examined whether the interest paid on account of the delayed payment of Agricultural Income Tax is eligible for deduction under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Case Title: Thekkee Cherupillil Sarada v. Income Tax Officer
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 808
The Kerala High Court has held that an Income Tax Appeal cannot be rejected solely for the assessee's non-appearance before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).
Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. stated that none of the provisions in Section 250 of the Income Tax Act permit the appellate authority to reject the appeal on the ground of non-appearance of the assessee/appellant, without going into the merits of the case.
Case Title: Rajeev K.P. v. Unais K.K.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 809
The Kerala High Court has put a temporary restraint on a Kozhikode-based business from making or selling compost bins using the name “Bokashi Bucket,” after finding that the term is a registered trademark owned by Global Pharmaceuticals.
A single bench of Justice S. Manu passed the order on November 18, 2025, overturning an Additional District Court order refusing to grant protection to the company.
Case Title: M/s K.V. Joshy & C.K. Paul v. The Assistant Commissioner
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 810
The Kerala High Court has held that the department cannot proceed against a recipient for ITC mismatch without first initiating proceedings against the supplier.
Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. observed that no proceedings had been initiated against the suppliers before the issuance of notice under Section 73 of the CSGT Act. This amounts to the failure on the part of the department in following the statutory stipulations contained in Section 42.
Case Title: V.R. Sudheer v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 811
The Kerala High Court recently issued detailed directions to the police and the State Election Commission (SEC) for the peaceful conduct of elections in the wake of upcoming general elections to the local bodies.
Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan was considering a batch of writ petitions filed apprehending law and order problems and, therefore, seeking deployment of additional police force, web casting/videography in the respective polling booths.
Case Title: Jiostar India Private Limited (Formerly known as Star India Pvt Ltd) v. Competition Commission of India and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 812
The Kerala High Court has recently held that the Competition Commission of India (CCI) has full authority to investigate allegations of discriminatory pricing and abuse of dominance in the broadcasting market even though the sector is regulated by TRAI.
A bench of Justices Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Syam Kumar V.M. said the Competition Act is an independent enactment that operates in parallel with the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997.
Case Title: Thilakeshwari @ Sheela Kurian v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 813
The Kerala High Court on Friday (December 5) directed the Inspector General of Police, Ernakulam range to consider the representation made by film producer Sheela Kurian seeking action against Deputy Superintendent of Police, Madhu Babu, alleging improper behaviour by him when she visited his office in connection with a criminal complaint.
When the matter came up for consideration before Justice C. Pratheep Kumar, Sheela's counsel submitted that though representations were made before several authorities to action with respect to the incident that occurred around 10 months ago, nothing has yet been taken.
Other Important Developments This Week
Case Title: Santon Lama v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP (Crl) No. 1421/2025
The Kerala High Court on Monday (December 01) directed the Director General of Police to make available before it all details about the body traced out from a marshy area in Kalamassery, which is suspected to belong to Suraj Lama, who has been missing since October 5 after he arrived in Kochi from Kuwait.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice M.B. Snehalatha was hearing the habeas corpus plea filed by the missing man's son.
Case Title: Shaji J. Kodankadath v. Union of India and connected cases
Case No: WP(C) 20253/2021 and connected cases
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (02 December) directed the National Highways Authority of India to report the time period prescribed in its agreement with the Contractor for the completion of National Highway stretch in NH-544.
The division bench comprising Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Harisankar V. Menon were considering the writ petition regarding traffic congestion on NH-544.
Case Title: Advaith M. v. State of Kerala
Case No: WP(C) 4269/ 2025
The Transplantation Advisory Committee constituted under the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act has recently informed the Kerala High Court that public appeals calling for Organ Donors are contrary to law under the Transplantation Act and has recommended the creation of an Anonymous Online Donor Platform.
The submissions were made before the division bench comprising Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. in writ petition, which has raised several issues regarding organ donation in the state of Kerala.
Case Title: Muhammed Anwar Saidu v. Bar Council of India and Others
Case No: WP(C) 39952/ 2025
The Principal of the Government Law College, Kozhikode recently filed a statement before the Kerala High Court wherein it told that in addition to the government law colleges in Kozhikode, Thrissur and Thiruvananthapuram, several other legal education institutions do not possess affiliation from the Bar Council of India.
The statement was filed in a plea preferred by an Idukki-based advocate, who has prayed for a retrospective recognition from the BCI to the 5-year-integrated course offered by the Government Law College, Kozhikode.
Case Title: Sivan Kutty Nair and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP(C) No. 40345 of 2025
The Kerala High Court, on a recent occasion, passed an interim order granting relief to around 60 traditional farmers whose properties are located adjacent to the Vellayani Lake, which is stated to be marked for development by the State government.
Justice C. Jayachandran directed the state government, its Water Resources, Agriculture and Revenue departments and the District Collector of Thiruvananthapuram not to illegally dispossess the petitioners from their properties located in Venganoor and Kaliyoor villages.
Case Title: Suo Motu v. State of Kerala
Case No: SSCR No. 37 of 2025
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (December 03) ordered that status quo shall be maintained so as to ensure compliance with its November 27 directions regarding entry to Sabarimala temple only with valid passes and strict adherence to permitted date/time slots.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Raja Vijaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar, after considering the submissions made before it deemed it necessary that its earlier directions ought to continue.
Kerala High Court Grants SIT Six More Weeks To Complete Probe Into Sabarimala Gold Theft Case
Case Title: Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP(C) No. 40608 of 2025
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (December 3) gave the Special Investigation Team (SIT) 6 more weeks to conclude its investigation into the plundering of gold from the Dwarapalaka idols and lintels of the Sabarimala temple.
The Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar had conducted the proceedings in-camera and interacted with the investigating officer, who had placed a progress report regarding the investigation before the Court.
Case Title: Santon Lama v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP (Crl) No. 1421/2025
The Kerala High Court on Thursday (December 04) expressed concern over the administrative handling of Suraj Lama, an Indian citizen who was reportedly deported from Kuwait and subsequently went missing after arriving in Kochi.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice M.B. Snehalatha were hearing the habeas corpus plea filed by the missing man's son.
Case Title: Suo Motu v. Union Government
Case No: SSCR 29/ 2025
In a move to ascertain whether the KumKum being distributed in Erumeli Panchayat is naturally sourced or chemical KumKum, the Kerala High Court on Wednesday (December 3) suo motu impleaded the enterprise distributing the KumKum and the agency certifying it to be naturally sourced.
The Division Bench of Justices Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and K.V. Jayakumar was seized with a suo motu petition initiated to oversee whether there are adequate facilities in the edathavalams (resting places) for the Sabarimala pilgrims.
After Catholic Congress, Union Govt & CBFC Move Kerala High Court In Appeal Challenging 'Haal' Movie
Case Title: Union of India and Ors. v. Juby Thomas and Ors. and connected case.
Case No: WA 2926/ 2025 and connected case
The Union Government on Thursday (December 4) moved an appeal before the Kerala High Court challenging the Single Bench's decision quashing the A-certification and cuts to the movie 'Haal' starring Shane Nigam.
This is the second appeal preferred against the judgment, the earlier being filed by the Catholic Congress. Today, both the appeals were considered together by the Bench of Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice P.V. Balakrishnan.
Case Title: Gigi John v. Union of India and Ors.
Case No: WP(C) 35600/ 2024
The Kerala High Court recently (November 29) pulled up the Central and State Pollution Control Boards for the delay in the implementation of environmental compensation (EC) under the Plastic Waste Management Rules, 2016.
It has also directed the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), to issue a time limit within which the mechanism for collection of EC will be put in place.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. issued the directive while hearing a petition in which one of the issues raised is with respect to imposition of environmental compensation.
Case Title: R. Murari Babu v. State of Kerala
Case No: Bail Appl. 14394/2025 and Bail Appl. 14395/2025
The Kerala High Court on Friday (December 5) asked the prosecution to take instructions on two bail pleas preferred by R. Murari Babu, who is the 2nd accused in the Sabarimala gold theft case.
When the cases came up for consideration today, Justice A. Badharudeen gave time to prosecutor to take instructions and to file a report, if necessary. The case is posted on December 11 (Thursday) for further consideration.
Palakkad MLA Rahul Mamkootathil Moves Kerala High Court Seeking Pre-Arrest Bail In Rape Case
Case Title: Rahul B.R. v. State of Kerala and Anr.
Case No: Bail Appl. 14427/2025
Palakkad MLA Rahul Mamkootathil has moved the Kerala High Court seeking anticipatory bail in the rape and miscarriage case alleged against him.
Yesterday, his plea before the Principal District and Sessions Court was dismissed noting that serious allegations have been made out against him, prima facie.
Case Title: Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP(C) No. 42844/2025
The amicus curiae appointed by the Kerala High Court in its suo motu case to address the infrastructural and other issues in the mediation/ADR centres in the State, has filed a detailed preliminary report.
The Court had earlier observed that the main infrastructural issues faced by the mediation centres are lack of proper place/venue for conducting mediation, inability to ensure privacy, inadequate physical and digital infrastructure, lack of staff, etc.
Issued Circular On Guidelines For Public Prosecutors' Appointment : State Tells Kerala High Court
Case Title: Adv. Sudheer P.S. v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP(PIL) 152/ 2025
The Kerala High Court was on Friday (December 05) informed that a circular has been issued by the Law Secretary of the State regarding guidelines for the appointment of Public Prosecutors.
The Director General of Prosecution submitted that the circular is in consonance with the directions issued in Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and Others.
Noting the development, the Division Bench of Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. asked the counsel for the petitioner and the High Court Administration to examine the same and to convey their opinions.
Case Title: Rahul B.R. v. State of Kerala and Anr.
Case No: Bail Appl. 14427/2025
The Kerala High Court on Saturday (December 6) granted interim protection from arrest to Palakkad MLA Rahul Mamkootathil, who is arraigned in a rape and miscarriage case.
When the case came up for consideration, Justice K. Babu made it clear that Mamkootathil cannot be arrested during the pendency of his anticipatory bail application.
Case Title: Suo Motu v. State of Kerala
Case No: SSCR 37/ 2025
The Kerala High Court on Friday (05 December) expressed satisfaction with the report submitted by the Additional Director General of Police and Chief Co-ordinator, Sabarimala regarding the crowd management strategies intended to ensure safety at Sannidhanam during the Mandala Makaravilakku season.
The division bench comprising Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar, considering the suo proceedings initiated regarding the crowd management during the Makaravilakku season observed:
“We find the report to be satisfactory, comprehensive, and well thought out.”
Kerala High Court Calls For SIT Probe Into Alleged Illegal Surrogacy Practices By ART Bank
Case Title: ART Bank v. State Police Chief of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP(Crl.) 1035/ 2025
The Kerala High Court on Friday (5 December) suggested setting up a Special Investigation Team (SIT) for investigation into the Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Bank case.
The division bench comprising Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice M.B. Snehalatha was considering a writ petition filed by ART Bank against the State Police Chief, Health Department officials, and others alleging that women who had voluntarily visited the petitioner's institution for medical screening were illegally taken into custody by the police and the Health Department.
Case Title: Suo Motu v. Union Government and Ors.
Case No: SSCR 29/ 2025
The Kerala High Court on Friday (05 December) passed a detailed order directing a series of investigations, inspections, and regulatory interventions to curb the sale of synthetic Kumkum during Sabarimala Makaravilakku season.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and Justice K.V. Jayakumar issued the directives while considering a suo motu matter based on the Sabarimala Special Commissioner's report.