Nominal Index [Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 245 - 251]P. Sudhakaran v State of Kerala and Others & Connected cases, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 245Flemingo (DFS) Private Limited Versus Airports Authority Of India, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 246Suo Motu v State of Kerala and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 247XX v YY, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 248Baburajan v State of Kerala and Others & Connected Case, 2025...
Nominal Index [Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 245 - 251]
P. Sudhakaran v State of Kerala and Others & Connected cases, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 245
Flemingo (DFS) Private Limited Versus Airports Authority Of India, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 246
Suo Motu v State of Kerala and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 247
XX v YY, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 248
Baburajan v State of Kerala and Others & Connected Case, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 249
XX v YY, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 250
Soorya Kiran And Another v State of Kerala And Others & Connected Cases, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 251
Judgments/ Orders This Week
Case Title: P. Sudhakaran v State of Kerala and Others & Connected cases
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 245
The Kerala High Court bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Viju Abraham has remarked that while worship of deities may be an individual's religious or spiritual need, temple festivals are the expression of a community's joy.
The Court was hearing the state's submissions regarding its investigation into the alleged disruptions caused during last year's Thrissur Pooram.
Case Title: Flemingo (DFS) Private Limited Versus Airports Authority Of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 246
The Kerala High Court bench of Justice Harisankar V. Menon has held that a writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India can be entertained against an order passed by the Commercial Court under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) when such an order neither grants nor refuses to grant relief, thereby not making it appealable under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act.
Case Title: Suo Motu v State of Kerala and Others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 247
The Kerala High Court has directed the State to give primacy to the opinion of the District Judge while appointing Public Prosecutors and formulate guidelines to that effect. The Court further directed the State to fill any vacancy of Prosecutors remaining unfilled in various courts without much delay.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Ziyad Rahman A. A., relying on the judgments of the Supreme Court in State of U. P. and Another v Johri Mal (2023) held that primacy has to be given to the opinion of the District Judge while appointment. Further, taking into account the delay caused in filling up some vacancies of Public Prosecutor in certain courts, the Court issued guidelines:
Case Title: XX v YY
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 248
'Taken aback' by the trauma that Court appearances caused to a child involved in custody battle, the Kerala High Court has directed Family Courts to ensure that children are called to Courts only in extraordinary situation and with great caution.
The Division Bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice M. B. Snehalatha ordered that children should be called to the Court premises only sparingly even if it is for the purpose of counselling or other statutory proceedings. The Court added that in cases where they are asked to be produced, they should be treated with dignity and privacy. The Court said that the children should not be made to wait infinitely till the court proceedings are over but should be given preference subject to the workload of the Court.
Case Title: Baburajan v State of Kerala and Others & Connected Case
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 249
The Kerala High Court has remarked that it is high time for a legal framework to be set up to compensate victims of wrongful prosecution, noting that as of now, a wrongly convicted person only has a remedy under private law by instituting a suit against the State before civil court for damages.
Justice Kauser Edappagath in his order remarked that wrongful convictions violate the fundamental rights of a person.
Case Title: XX v YY
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 250
While quashing two cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act where the accused and victims got married, the Kerala High Court observed that though generally POCSO offences cannot be quashed on the ground of settlement between parties, however, in "extreme mitigating circumstances", not quashing the proceedings may result in injustice.
Justice C. Jayachandran opined that there cannot be an absolute stand that no POCSO case can be quashed.
Case Title: Soorya Kiran And Another v State of Kerala And Others & Connected Cases
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 251
The Kerala High Court on Friday (25th April) denied bail to the 5 juveniles who are apprehended for being involved in the murder of 15-year-old Shahabas, a class 10 student who was allegedly attacked by his tuition fellows in Kozhikkode which lead to his death.
"Considering the above aspects, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners" Justice Jobin Sebastian ordered.
Other Important Developments This Week
Three Kerala High Court Judges Narrowly Escape Pahalagam Terror Attack
Judges Anil K. Narendran, G. Girish and P. G. Ajithkumar had a narrow escape from the terror attacks that happened in Pahalgam on 22nd April.
Kerala Bar Association Scripts History, Elects Only Women As Office Bearers
Marking a historic first, the Pala Bar Association in Kerala has elected an all-women panel to serve as office bearers and members of its executive committee. The election, which filled 15 positions, comes at a time when calls for increased women's representation in bar associations are gaining momentum across the country.