Nominal Index [Citations: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 32 - 48]Reshmi Saseendran v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 32 Malu K. v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 33Bineesh v. Mathew Joseph and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 34Pradeep S v Gopakaumar Nair and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 35Adv. Shani A.R. and Ors. v. Bar Council of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 36P G Thomas Tharakan...
Nominal Index [Citations: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 32 - 48]
Reshmi Saseendran v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 32
Malu K. v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 33
Bineesh v. Mathew Joseph and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 34
Pradeep S v Gopakaumar Nair and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 35
Adv. Shani A.R. and Ors. v. Bar Council of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 36
P G Thomas Tharakan v The State Land Board and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw(Ker) 37
Hari v. The State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 38
Thenu Jeyapriyan and Anr. v. The Foreigners Regional Registration Officer and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 39
Soumya Gopal v State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 40
Roddam Pandurangaiah Naga Govardhan v. State of Kerala and connected matter, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 41
Sohan V M v State of Kerala and Anr, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 42
Suo Motu v State of Kerala and Anr, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 43
Vijith v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 44
Esai Clara v State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 45
Sangeetha Lakshmana v Registrar General and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 46
Athul P. and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 47
Indian Association Of Physical Medicine And Rehabilitation (IAPMR) v. Union of India and Ors. and connected cases, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 48
Judgment/ Orders This Week
Victim's Statement Alone Can Sustain Charge Under SC/ST Act: Kerala High Court
Case Title: Reshmi Saseendran v. State of Kerala and Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 32
The Kerala High Court in a recent decision held that an accused cannot be discharged merely because the statements of the witnesses do not disclose ingredients of the offence under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2018.
Justice A. Badharudheen clarified that if the statement of the aggrieved person prima facie discloses the offence, then that would be sufficient.
Authorised Govt Officer's Complaint Necessary To Prosecute Notary: Kerala High Court
Case Title: Malu K. v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 33
The Kerala High Court recently clarified that as per Section 13(i) of the Notaries Act, a complaint by an officer authorized by the government concerned is necessary for taking cognizance of offence committed by a notary public exercising functions under the Act.
Justice C. Pratheep Kumar, after referring to the provision and noting non-compliance, set aside all further proceedings against a notary arrayed as an accused in a crime.
Case Title: Bineesh v. Mathew Joseph and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 34
The Kerala High Court recently clarified that contributory negligence cannot be attributed on a victim of a motor accident merely because he was carrying two pillion riders on the motorcycle.
Justice Jobin Sebastian observed that the insurer must bring in evidence showing that the act of carrying two pillion riders had a direct and proximate cause, connecting it with the accident.
Case Title: Pradeep S v Gopakaumar Nair and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 35
The Kerala High Court has recently held that a dismissal for default alone cannot justify the rejection of restoration plea citing lack of vigilance.
Justice T R Ravi made the observation in a petition challenging rejection of an application seeking restoration of execution proceedings, which were dismissed for default.
Kerala High Court Orders State Bar Council To Refund ₹5K Excess Enrolment Fee Collected From Lawyers
Case Title: Adv. Shani A.R. and Ors. v. Bar Council of Kerala and Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 36
The Kerala High Court on Monday (January 19) directed the Bar Council of Kerala to refund the excess amount collected from seven lawyers to conduct their enrolments.
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas directed the Bar Council of Kerala to refund to each of the petitioners the excess fee of Rs. 5000 collected from them within 2 weeks of receipt of the judgment.
Kerala Land Reforms Act | Article 226 Can Be Invoked To Divest Land Vested With Govt: High Court
Case Title: P G Thomas Tharakan v The State Land Board and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw(Ker) 37
The Kerala High Court has recently held that while excess land vests absolutely in the Government upon issuance of an order under Section 86 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (KLR Act), the constitutional courts may still exercise its power under Article 226 to order divesting such land in exceptional circumstances to prevent injustice and violation of property rights under Article 300A of the Constitution.
Justice C Jayachandran delivered the judgment.
S.399 IPC | Preparation For Dacoity Requires Five Or More Persons: Kerala High Court
Case Title: Hari v. The State of Kerala
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 38
The Kerala High Court, in a recent ruling, clarified that a minimum of five persons are required to attract the offence of making preparation to commit dacoity under Section 399 of the Indian Penal Code.
Justice M.B. Snehalatha looked into the definition of 'dacoity' provided under Section 391 IPC and observed:
“A reading of Section 391 of IPC would show that the essential or core ingredient of the offence of dacoity is that there should be five or more persons. Section 399 IPC deals with making preparation to commit dacoity and therefore, the numerical requirement applicable to dacoity is equally applicable to preparation for it. If the number is less than five, the offence of dacoity or the offence of preparation to commit dacoity under Section 399 IPC will not attract. If fewer than five persons are involved, the preparation cannot be said to be for committing dacoity, because the numerical requirement of five or more persons mandatory under Section 391 IPC is equally applicable to Section 399 IPC.”
Case Title: Thenu Jeyapriyan and Anr. v. The Foreigners Regional Registration Officer and Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 39
The Kerala High Court recently directed the repatriation of two Srilankan citizens, who are the children of the accused persons in two cases being investigated by the National Investigation Agency (NIA).
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas was considering the plea preferred by the petitioners seeking a declaration that their continued detention in the Transit Home after a period of more than 2 years was illegal.
Case Title: Soumya Gopal v State of Kerala and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 40
The Kerala High Court has held that a victim whether they are complainant or not has a statutory right of appeal against acquittal of accused without seeking leave of the High Court, however such appeal must be filed before the appropriate Court.
Justice A. Badharudeen was considering a woman's appeal under Section 413 BNSS challenging the acquittal of a man who was accused of offences under IPC Sections 354 (Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty)and 354D (Stalking).
Case Title: Roddam Pandurangaiah Naga Govardhan v. State of Kerala, A. Padmakumar v. State of Kerala, B. Murari Babu v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 41
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (January 21) denied bail to Jeweller Roddam Govardhan and former Travancore Devaswom Board officials A. Padmakumar and Murari Babu, who are accused of misappropriating gold from the Dwarapalaka idols and door frames of the Sreekovil in Sabarimala.
Justice A. Badharudeen pronounced the order today in open court after reserving the verdict.
Case Title: Sohan V M v State of Kerala and Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 42
The Kerala High Court has recently (January 19) held that a person born outside the State cannot be denied a domicile certificate if their permanent residence and social belongingness are demonstrably in Kerala.
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas made the observation in a plea challenging rejection of Petitioner's application for issuance of domicile certificate on the ground that he and his parents were born and brought up in Kolkata.
Case Title: Suo Motu v State of Kerala and Anr
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 43
The Kerala High Court has reiterated that sanction under Section 188 of CrPC is not required at the stage of taking cognizance of an offence committed outside India, while it is required for commencement of the trial.
Justice C Pratheep Kumar while dealing with a criminal revision petition observed,
"At the stage of taking cognizance of an offence, sanction under Section 188 of Cr.P.C is not required, while it is required for commencement of the trial."
Case Title: Vijith v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 44
The Kerala High Court recently modified an externment order restraining a person from entering the Thrissur revenue district after finding that there was no reason assigned for passing the order for maximum period.
The Division Bench of Dr. Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Jobin Sebastian observed that an externment order would have a huge impact on the fundamental and personal rights of a person and therefore, while passing the maximum period, the authority must assign proper reasons for the same.
Case Title: Esai Clara v State of Kerala
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 45
The Kerala High Court on Thursday (22 January) closed the plea by a law aspirant seeking reservation under the transgender category for admission to the Integrated Five Year LL.B Course in Government Law College, Kozhikode.
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, closed the petition when it was informed that the petitioner has acquired admission at the Government Law College, Kozhikode
Case Title: Sangeetha Lakshmana v Registrar General and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 46
The Kerala High Court has held that disputes relating to elections of the Kerala High Court Advocates' Association (KHCAA) cannot be entertained under Article 226 of the Constitution, holding that the Association is neither a public authority nor a body discharging public functions.
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas delivered the judgement while dismissing a writ petition filed by a member of the KHCAA challenging the 2026 Association elections, including the voters' list, election notification, and the declaration of results.
Case Title: Athul P. and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 47
The Kerala High Court recently clarified that since Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act provides that Section 438 CrPC regarding pre-arrest bail is not applicable to persons committing offences under the Act, the same can be said about its corresponding provision, Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Justice A. Badharudeen was delivering judgement in an appeal preferred under Section 14A of the Act against the Special Court's order denying bail to two persons accused of committing offences under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 110, 324(4), 189(2), 191(2), 191(3) and 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita as well as under Sections 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Act.
Case Title: Indian Association Of Physical Medicine And Rehabilitation (IAPMR) v. Union of India and Ors. and connected cases
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 48
The Kerala High Court has held that the title 'doctor' does not belong exclusively to medical professionals and that physiotherapists and occupational therapists can use the 'Dr.' prefix.
Justice V.G. Arun pronounced the judgment dismissing the pleas preferred by Indian Medical Association, Indian Association Of Physical Medicine And Rehabilitation (IAPMR) and its Secretary.
Other Important Developments This Week
Former Kerala High Court Judge Retd. Justice A Lekshmikutty Passes Away
Justice A. Lekshmikutty, former judge of the Kerala High Court, passed away on Monday (January 19).
Sabarimala Gold Theft: Kerala High Court Questions Motive Behind Plea Seeking CBI Probe
Case Title: M.S. Sreerajkrishnan Potti and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.
Case No: WP(C) 1862/2026
When the matter came up for consideration, the Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar orally remarked:
"Without even understanding what is transpiring, you have raised certain allegations trying to protect the accused from the crimes. There is no reason why you should file a writ petition saying, at this particular point of time after we have passed 10 orders, that the gold plating of Dwarapalaka idols...You are saying that all these persons who have been arrayed as accused are innocent people. You are saying that the Dwarapalakas were not gold-cladded, it was gold plated. We have the analysis report here..."
Case Title: M K Vinayakumar v District Collector and Ors
Case No: WP(C) 2173/ 2026
A petition has been filed before the Kerala High Court challenging the stop memo issued by the revenue authorities halting the construction of a temporary bridge on the Bharathapuzha river for the 'Maha Magha' festival, scheduled to be held from January 18 to February 03 at Thirunavaya.
Justice C Jayachandran has sought response from the State authorities an listed the matter for hearing tomorrow.
Case Title: Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP(C) No. 40608 of 2025
The Kerala High Court on Monday (January 19) observed that a systematic and methodical process went into the misappropriation of gold from the Dwarapalaka idols and door frames of the Sabarimala temple.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar made the observation after the Special Investigation Team (SIT) investigating into the case submitted a comprehensive progress report along with the chemical analysis report prepared by the Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC).
Case Title: Vinod Mukundan and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors, and connected cases
Case Nos: WA No. 111 of 2026 and connected cases
The Kerala High Court on Monday (January 19) passed an interim order directing the Central government, GST Council, Union Bank and others not to levy Goods and Service Tax (GST) on the insurance premium paid by the retired employees of the Union Bank of India and similarly placed persons for the policy year 2025-26.
The Division Bench of Justice V.G. Arun and Justice Harisankar V. Menon was considering a batch of writ appeals, which had challenged a judgment of the Single Bench that had held that GST exemption on health insurance policies applies only to individual policies and not group ones.
Kerala High Court Orders Safety Inspection Of Temporary Bridges For Thirunavaya Maha Magha Festival
Case Title: M K Vinayakumar v District Collector and Ors
Case No: WP(C) 2173/ 2026
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (20 January) directed an inspection by the Public Works Department (PWD) of the temporary bridges constructed on Bharathapuzha river in connection with the ongoing Maha Magha Mahotsava in Thirunavaya.
Justice C Jayachandran, gave the directions in a petition challenging the stop memo issued by the revenue authorities halting the construction of the bridge over alleged violation of the Kerala Riverbank Protection Act, 2001.
Kerala High Court Issues Notice On PIL Challenging BEVCO's Liquor Branding Contest
Case Title: M M Sanjeev Kumar v State of Kerala and Ors and connected matter
Case No: WP(PIL) 2/ 2026 and WP(PIL) 7/ 2026
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (20 January) issued notice to State and Kerala State Beverages (Manufacturing and Marketing) Corporation (BEVCO) in a public interest litigation challenging a contest announced by BEVCO and Malabar Distilleries Ltd. inviting the public to suggest a name and logo for a proposed premium brandy product.
The division bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V M, issued the notice to the respondents and directed them to file a counter affidavit in the matter.
Kerala High Court Mourns Demise Of Former Judge Justice A Lekshmikutty
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (January 21) mourned the passing of Justice A. Lekshmikutty (81), who had served as judge of the High Court.
Case Title: Mar Joseph Pamplany v The State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP(C) 2346/ 2026
Archbishop Mar Joseph Pamplany has approached the Kerala High Court seeking immediate police intervention to remove alleged trespassers from St. Mary's Cathedral Basilica, Broadway, Ernakulam, citing continued obstruction of religious activities and denial of access to parishioners.
The petitioner is the Vicar of the Major Archbishop of the Ernakulam- Angamaly Archdiocese of the Syro Malabar Church. The petitioner alleges that a group led by certain parishioners unlawfully entered and occupied the Basilica on December 10, 2025, preventing priests and devotees from freely accessing the church and conducting religious services.
Case Title: Rahul B.R. v. State of Kerala and Anr.
Case No: Bail Appl. 14427/2025
The victim/de facto complainant in the first rape case filed against Palakkad MLA Rahul Mamkootathil has filed detailed objections before the Kerala High Court, opposing his anticipatory bail plea.
Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath has posted the matter for next Wednesday (January 28), to conduct a detailed hearing. Meanwhile, the Court has extended its interim order granting the MLA protection from arrest. Nonetheless, Rahul remains in judicial custody following his arrest in the third rape case.
Case Title: Pankaj Bhandari v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP (Crl.) 52/2026
Pankaj Bhandari, CEO of Smart Creations, Chennai has moved the Kerala High Court challenging his arrest in the Sabarimala gold theft case as illegal and violative of the Constitution of India.
Justice A. Badharudeen, on Wednesday (January 21), heard detailed arguments advanced by Senior advocate B. Raman Pillai, who appeared for Bhandari and by Additional Director General of Prosecution (ADGP) Gracious Kuriakose for the prosecution.
The Court then deferred further hearing in the case to Tuesday (January 27).
Case Title: Muhammed Anwar Saidu v. Bar Council of India and Others
Case No: WP(C) 39952/ 2025
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (January 20) orally remarked that the students of the Government Law College, Kozhikode are greatly prejudiced with the institute's BCI affiliation issue not yet being resolved.
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas was considering 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 college.
Case Title: R.S. Sasikumar v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP(PIL) 12/ 2026
The Kerala High Court on Thursday (January 22) directed the State to file a counter responding to the public interest litigation preferred by Kerala University ex-Joint Registrar, challenging the assignment of the University's land to AKG Centre for Research and Studies in the year 1977.
The State told the Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M., that the dispute regarding the extent of land is subject to verification and that a counter-affidavit in this regard would be filed.
Case Title: Pamba Boat Race Club Neerattupuram and Anr v State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP(C) 32982/ 2025
The Kerala High Court on Thursday (22 January) directed the District Collector, Pathanamthitta to grant permission to the Pamba Boat Race Club, Neerattupuram, to conduct its boat race on 1 February, 2026.
Justice N Nagaresh, gave the direction while considering a writ petition filed by the club and its office-bearers challenging the refusal of the district administration to grant permission for a revised date.
Case Title: Adv Rajesh Vijayan v Bar Council of India and Another
Case No: WP(C) 36545/ 2025
The Kerala High Court on Friday (January 23) quizzed the Bar Council of India while hearing a plea challenging BCI's recent decision to hike the nomination fee for State Bar Council elections from ₹5,000 to ₹1,25,000— a 2400% increase.
When the matter came up, Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, asked the BCI what the funds would be utilised for.
"What is the fund for? Enrolment you are charging fee...What activities? Can that be a reason for charging 1.25 lakhs for nomination?," the Court orally asked.
Case Title: Rahul K T v St. Stephen's Malankara Catholic Church
Case No: RP1394/ 2025 in WP(C) 22750/ 2018
The Kerala High Court on Friday (23 January) orally expressed displeasure over the continued installation of unauthorized boards and flags in public spaces across the State despite clear judicial directions, observing that the situation was shocking and disturbing.
Justice Devan Ramachandran was considering a review petition filed in connection with a plea against illegal and unauthorized flags and banners.
Justice V G Arun of the Kerala High Court on Friday (23 January) said that he is perturbed by the fact that even though there are excellent lady lawyers, their representation in the bench is miniscule and added that he hoped that it would change in the near future.
The remarks were made during the farewell address, during the Full Court Reference held at the Kerala High Court as he was demitting office upon attaining the age of superannuation.
Justice VG Arun : Gentleman Judge With Progressive Views
January 23, 2026 marked the retirement of one of the most eminent judges of the Kerala High Court, Justice V.G. Arun known for his calm composure and gentle demeanour among the members of the Bar.
Justice Arun has spoken loudly through his forwarded-thinking judgments on freedom of speech and expression, mental health, secularism, equal rights, freedom from surveillance, to name just a few. The article discusses various important judgments delivered by Justice V G Arun during his tenure as the Judge of Kerala High Court which as the author said will remain etched in the treasure trove Indian Jurisprudence.
Former Kerala High Court Judge S Siri Jagan Passes Away
Justice (Retired) S Siri Jagan, former Judge of the Kerala High Court, passed away.