Nominal Index [Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 720 - 741]Shareena v State of Kerala and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 720Vittal Sait Popat v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 721Venugopal K Veloth v Mahilamani and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 722Thangam v. V.V. Haridasan and Anr., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 723Rifa Fathima v. Salim and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 724Sigmatic Nidhi Ltd....
Nominal Index [Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 720 - 741]
Shareena v State of Kerala and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 720
Vittal Sait Popat v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 721
Venugopal K Veloth v Mahilamani and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 722
Thangam v. V.V. Haridasan and Anr., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 723
Rifa Fathima v. Salim and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 724
Sigmatic Nidhi Ltd. V Suresh Kumar, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 725
Manu S v State of Kerala and Ors, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 726
Jatin v. State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 727
Pramod Prasannan v. State of Kerala and Jishnu Reghu v. State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 728
Glenny C.J. and Anr. v. Authorised Officer, Canara Bank and Anr., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 729
Jissy S. v. State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 730
Farookh v Kayyakutty @ Kadeeja, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 731
Roopesh T.R. v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 732
Aneesh v State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 733
Vinumon C v The District Collector and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 734
Janvin Cleetus v Union of India, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 735
Mini R K v State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 736
M/S Amal Neerad Productions LLP v Union of India, 2025 Livelaw (Ker) 737
Juby Thomas and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 738
State of Kerala v. The Election Commission of India and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 739
Sivasankaran @ Sankarankutty and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 740
Mathew K. Cherian v. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 741
Judgments/ Orders This Week
Case Title: Shareena v State of Kerala and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 720
The Kerala High Court has directed the State Police Chief to issue necessary instructions to investigating authorities in criminal cases to issue notices to the de facto complainants or their legal heirs when a person named as an accused in the FIR is removed from the list of accused during the course of investigation.
The division bench comprising Dr. Justice A K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Jobin Sebastian, issued the directions while dismissing an appeal against the judgment of a single judge.
Case Title: Vittal Sait Popat v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 721
The Kerala High Court has held that disclosure of income and payment of tax under the Income Tax Act, 1961, does not preclude initiation of proceedings under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988.
Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. agreed with the department that the fact that the assessees have disclosed the income in the return and the same was proceeded against under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, by itself, cannot be a reason to interfere with the proceedings under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988.
Case Title: Venugopal K Veloth v Mahilamani and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 722
The Kerala High Court has reaffirmed that a 'melpattam' arrangement does not create ownership or a transferable interest in the land itself.
The division bench comprising Justice Sathish Ninan and Justice P Krishna Kumar, delivered the judgment while dismissing an appeal challenging a preliminary decree for partition passed by the Sub Court, Vadakara.
Case Title: Thangam v. V.V. Haridasan and Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 723
The Kerala High Court recently upheld the trial court's finding of acquittal in an appeal preferred by the complainant in a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, alleging dishonour of a cheque by the accused.
Analysing the precedents laid down, Justice Johnson John observed that when the defence evidence to dispute the transaction as well as the financial capacity of the complainant was sufficient to rebut the presumption under Section 139 NI Act regarding existence of a valid debt.
Case Title: Rifa Fathima v. Salim and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 724
The Kerala High Court has recently held that a court can attach a father's retirement benefits for maintaining his child. It further clarified that the exemption under Section 60(1)(g) of the Code of Civil Procedure, which provides that stipends and gratuities of pensioners are not liable to attachment and sale in execution of a decree, would not apply in such cases.
Distinguishing the Supreme Court decision in Radhey Shyam Gupta v. Punjab National Bank (2009), the Division Bench comprising Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice M.B. Snehalatha observed that a minor daughter claiming maintenance cannot be equated with a creditor.
Arbitration Agreement Is Valid Even Without Signature If Parties Acted Upon It: Kerala High Court
Case Title: Sigmatic Nidhi Limited v Suresh Kumar
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 725
The Kerala High Court held that written agreement need not to be signed by the parties if the consensus ad idem and intention to arbitrate is reflected from the conduct of the parties and documentary evidence.
Justice S. Manu allowed the application seeking reference to arbitration holding that an arbitration agreement in writing may exist even without signatures provided there is a clear evidence that both parties acted upon it.
Case Title: Manu S v State of Kerala and Ors
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 726
The Kerala High Court recently quashed the criminal charges against a man who faced prosecution for a Facebook comment allegedly critical of contributions to the Chief Minister's Distress Relief Fund (CMDRF).
Justice V.G. Arun, delivering the judgment observed:
“Free flow of opinions and ideas is essential to sustain the collective life of the citizenry. Fear of setback to Government's initiatives, due to expression of opinion or dissent by a citizen, cannot result in Article 19(2), restricting the freedom of speech and expression, being brought into play.”
Case Title: Jatin v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 727
The Kerala High Court recently clarified that cultivation of cannabis plant is an offence under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act), and that it does not distinguish between cannabis plants grown in pots or in the earth.
Justice C.S. Dias observed,
“the expression 'cultivate any cannabis plant' used in Sections 8 (b) and 20 (a) of the Act encompasses any act of planting, tilling, raising, growing, farming or gardening a cannabis plant with the mens rea, whether such cultivation is carried out in the earth or in a pot. The statute does not distinguish between planting in the earth or growing in pots. The essence of the offence lies in the conscious act of planting and nurturing a cannabis plant in contravention of the provisions of the Act.”
Kerala High Court Grants Bail To Two Accused Booked For 2021 Murder Of CPI(M) Leader Sandeep Kumar
Case Title: Pramod Prasannan v. State of Kerala and Jishnu Reghu v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 728
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (November 11) granted bail to two persons, who are accused of the murder of the CPI(M) leader Sandeep Kumar in Pathanamthitta district, alleged to have been committed on December 2, 2021.
Justice K Babu, allowed the bail pleas and released the petitioners on bail, imposing stringent conditions. It further directed the Additional Sessions Court to dispose of the trial as expeditiously as possible, within a period of six months.
Case Title: Glenny C.J. and Anr. v. Authorised Officer, Canara Bank and Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 729
The Kerala High Court recently held that there is no mandate under law that the pre-deposit amount should always be 50% of the debt due, while entertaining appeals under Section 18 SARFAESI [Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest] Act, challenging the order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal.
Justice C Jayachandran, while delivering the judgement clarified that the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT), while determining the amount to be deposited, shall take into consideration the subject matter of the appeal.
Case Title: Jissy S. v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 730
The Kerala High Court recently quashed the criminal proceedings against the licensee of a rubber band manufacturing unit, who was booked under Sections 75 [Punishment for cruelty to child] and 79 [Exploitation of a child employee] of the Juvenile Justice Act for engaging child labourers.
Justice C. Pratheep Kumar relied on the Apex Court decision in Narang S.C. v. State (2025) and the Kerala High Court decision in Nizamudhin A. v. Station House Officer (2017) to come to the conclusion that from the facts, the offences alleged were not made out against the petitioner.
Case Title: Farookh v Kayyakutty @ Kadeeja
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 731
The Kerala High Court has held that the right of a woman to claim maintenance from her son or daughter under Section 144 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) is independent of her husband's obligation to maintain her.
Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath observed,
“The fact that the husband of a woman has sufficient means and provides maintenance to her would not absolve the son of his independent statutory obligation under Section 144(1) (d) of BNSS (Section 125(1)(d) of Cr.P.C.) to support his mother if she needs it.”
Case Title: Roopesh T.R. v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 732
The Kerala High Court recently directed the State government to consider a prisoner's application for permission to publish his book and to communicate its decision to him, within 3 months.
Justice V.G. Arun observed that incarceration or conviction does not take away the fundamental rights of a person completely and that the Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Rules, 2014 does not curtail the prisoners' right to read and write.
Case Title: Aneesh v State of Kerala
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 733
The Kerala High Court has held that specifying the quantity of the contraband seized under NDPS Act, 1985 in millilitres instead of grams does not vitiate the prosecution, provided the chemical analysis report establishes the equivalent strength in weight as prescribed under the law.
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, made the observation while delivering judgment in a criminal appeal against the conviction and sentence imposed under NDPS, Act.
Case Title: Vinumon C v The District Collector and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 734
The Kerala High Court has imposed ₹10,000 fine on a former Revenue Division Officer (RDO) for passing a "stereotypical" order on a landowner's application to remove his land from the data bank of paddy and wetland, despite repeated judgments directing the authorised officers to pass speaking orders in such cases.
Justice P V Kunhikrishnan remarked that the authorised officers are seemingly passing such orders based on a "standard order", forcing the litigants to approach the High Court every time, and in turn forcing the High Court to pass stereotypical judgments.
Case Title: Janvin Cleetus v Union of India
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 735
The Kerala High Court has held that the exclusion of transgender persons from the National Cadet Corps (NCC) does not currently violate the Constitution, as the National Cadet Corps Act, 1948, in its present form, restricts enrollment to students of the male and female sexes. The Court, however, urged the Union Government to consider amending the law to ensure inclusivity.
Justice N Nagaresh, delivered the judgment in a writ petition filed by a transgender student whose application for enrollment in NCC was rejected on the basis of gender identity.
Case Title: Mini R K v State of Kerala
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 736
The Kerala High Court has held that the remarriage of a widow does not extinguish her statutory right to appointment under Rule 51B of Chapter XIVA Kerala Education Rules, 1959.
Justice N Nagaresh held that compassionate appointment under Rule 51B is a vested statutory right and cannot be denied based on executive instructions applicable to government servants.
Case Title: M/S Amal Neerad Productions LLP v Union of India
Citation: 2025 Livelaw (Ker) 737
The Kerala High Court has directed the Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, to consider a representation made by Amal Neerad Productions LLP, the production house of the Malayalam movie Bougainvillea, that was allegedly unable to complete its online application for 72nd National Film Awards, 2024,due to a technical glitch on the official submission portal.
Justice V G Arun, gave the direction in a writ petition filed by the production house of 'Bougainvillae' malayalam movie.
Case Title: Juby Thomas and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 738
The Kerala High Court on Friday (November 14) asked the makers of Shane Nigam starrer 'Haal' to re-approach the Central Board of Film Certification.
Justice V.G. Arun allowed the plea and quashed the CBFC's decision. The Court observed:
"In the case at hand it is clear that, instead of judging the film as would be done by an ordinary prudent person, the Board's focus was on whether the film will ruffle a few oversensitive feathers. Even accepting the contention of the learned ASGI that the Censor Board is involved in the act of balancing the freedom of the movie maker with the reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2), such balancing act cannot be carried out by overlooking the foundational principles of secularism and fraternity which are the bedrock of our great democracy...Upon viewing the film from the perspective of an ordinary person, this Court found the theme of the film to be in tune with the foundational principles enunciated in our Constitution."
Case Title: Juby Thomas and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 738
The Kerala High Court on Friday (November 14) observed that a scene in Shane Nigam starrer 'Haal' movie depicting a Christian girl wearing a Muslim attire in a dance sequence, cannot be termed as indecent, immoral or capable of inciting violence.
The observation was made by Justice V.G. Arun while allowing a plea by the makers, challenging the A-certification granted by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) as well as the cuts suggested by it.
Kerala High Court Refuses To Defer SIR, Says State May Approach Supreme Court
Case Title: State of Kerala v. The Election Commission of India and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 739
The Kerala High Court today refused to defer the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in the State, ahead of elections to Local Self Government Institutions.
Justice V G Arun said similar matters are already pending before the Supreme Court and hence, judicial discipline demands the High Court to refrain from hearing the matter.
'No Proof Of Snooping': Kerala High Court Refuses To Order Removal Of Neighbours' CCTV Cameras
Case Title: Sivasankaran @ Sankarankutty and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 740
The Kerala High Court has recently dismissed a writ petition challenging the installation of a CCTV camera by neighbours, holding that the right to privacy under Article 21 cannot override another person's right to security unless unlawful intrusion is clearly established.
Justice N. Nagaresh delivered the judgment and observed: “Right to privacy of one and the right to security, which is an element of right to life of another, are to be balanced delicately when they are in conflict with each other.”
Case Title: Mathew K. Cherian v. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 741
The Kerala High Court recently clarified that when an individual invests in a company in his individual capacity, the same cannot be termed as a 'commercial transaction' and he would be treated as a consumer as per the meaning of Section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. was considering a petition preferred by the Managing Director of Kosamattam Finance against the orders of the District and State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions.
Other Important Developments This Week
Case Title: Sameer Khan and Ors v Special Deputy Tahsildar (RR) and Ors.
Case No: WP(C) 39775/ 2025
The Kerala High Court has restrained the Kerala State Financial Enterprises (KSFE) and its Recovery Officers from transferring amounts from a borrower's frozen bank account to third party accounts, holding that such a move would violate the constitutional protection against deprivation of property without authority of law under Article 300A of the Constitution of India.
Justice V.G. Arun granted the interim stay in a petition filed by persons whose bank accounts had been frozen following recovery proceedings initiated by KSFE under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968.
Kerala High Court Mourns Demise Of Former Judge Justice K. John Mathew
The Kerala High Court on Monday (November 10) mourned the passing of Justice K. John Mathew (93), who had served as judge of the High Court from 1984 to 1994.
After retirement, Justice Mathew was designated Senior Advocate by the Supreme Court and he continued his practice in New Delhi till 2003. He was head of the Government Commission setup to study the effects of Mineral Sand Mining along the coasts of Kerala and also the Chairperson of the Selection Committee under the Juvenile Justice Act. He was also appointed a SEBI Nominee Director and Chairman of the Cochin Stock Exchange after his tenure as judge.
A Full Court reference was held at the Chief Justice's Court with members of the bench and the bar paying their respects.
Kerala High Court Stays Electricity Regulatory Commission's 2025 Renewable Energy Regulations
Case No: WP(C) No. 39797 of 2025
Case Title: Domestic On-Grid Solar Power Prosumer Forum-Kerala and Anr v. State of Kerala and Ors.
The Kerala High Court on Monday (November 10) stayed the operation, implementation/ enforcement and all further proceedings under the Kerala State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Renewable Energy and Related Matters) Regulations, 2025 issued by the Regulatory Commission vide a notification on November 5.
Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. passed the interim order on a plea by Domestic On-Grid Solar Power Prosumer Forum – Kerala and its President, and stayed the Regulations for a period of one month.
Case Title: Santon Lama v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP(Crl.) No. 1421 of 2025
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (November 11) impleaded the Anti-Human Trafficking Unit and the Social Justice Department of the Kerala Government in the habeas corpus plea filed by Santon Lama to trace out his father, Suraj Lama – stated to be missing since October 5 since his arrival in Kochi from Kuwait.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice M.B. Snehalatha suo motu impleaded the parties.
Case Title: Dr. C.N. Vijayakumari v. State of Kerala and Anr.
Case No: Bail Appl. No. 13653 of 2025
The Kerala High Court on Monday (November 10) granted interim protection from arrest to Dr. C.N. Vijayakumari, Head of the Department of Sanskrit, Chairman of the Doctoral Committee, and Dean, Faculty of Oriental Studies at the University of Kerala.
Justice K. Babu passed the order in her anticipatory bail plea, after finding that she had established a prima facie case. The Court also asked her to implead the victim in the case as an additional respondent.
Kerala University Faculty Approaches High Court Alleging Harassment Over Sanskrit PhD Row
Case Title: Dr. C N Vijayakumari v the Chancellor and Others
Case No: WP(C) 42130/ 2025
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (11 November) directed the standing counsel for Kerala University to get instructions in a writ petition moved by DR. C N Vijayakumari, Dean of Faculty of Oriental Studies at the varsity, alleging harassment over Sanskrit Ph.D row.
When the matter was taken up for admission, Justice V G Arun directed the standing counsel to get instruction while observing that the petitioner is protected by an order preventing his arrest (passed in a bail application filed by the petitioner).
Case Title: Muhammed Anwar Saidu v Bar Council of India and Others
Case No: WP(C) 39952/ 2025
The Kerala High Court has sought response from the Bar Council of India in a plea alleging that the body failed to approve a five-year B.A LL.B course at Government Law College, Kozhikode, after 2011.
Justice V G Arun, has asked the standing counsel of the bar body to seek instructions in the matter.
The petition was filed by an advocate from Idukki, who discovered his law degree was deemed “unqualified” by the National Committee on Accreditation (NCA) in Canada when he sought to pursue higher education and legal opportunities in Canada.
Case Title: Pushpa N.P. v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP(Crl.) No. 1526 of 2025
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (November 11) sought the State's stand while considering a plea to transfer N.P. Sunil Kumar @ Kodi Suni, undergoing life imprisonment for the T.P. Chandrasekharan murder case, from Central Prison & Correctional Home, Thavanur (Malappuram) to Central Prison & Correctional Home, Kannur.
Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath was considering a petition filed by Suni's mother, who has stated that she has not seen her son for over 13 years. The trial court had convicted him in 2014 and 10 years later, the High Court had upheld the conviction.
Case Title: Suo Motu v State of Kerala and Ors
Case No: SSCR 34/ 2025
The Kerala High Court has directed the Chief Police Co-ordinator to submit details of all police officers currently holding critical positions in Sannidhanam and Pamba, along with the duration of their posting.
The division bench comprising Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and Justice K V Jayakumar issued the direction while considering a Special Commissioner report pertaining to change of Police Controller at Sannidhanam during the Mandala - Makaravilakku festival season 2025-26.
Case Title: Suo Motu v. Union Government
Case No: SSCR 29/ 2025
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (November 12) refused to modify its order banning the sale of chemical kumkum and shampoo sachets in Sabarimala.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar remarked that it is concerned about the devotees and ecology of Sabarimala, and not the commercial aspects of kuthaka holders (stall owners), who may be affected by the ban.
Case Title: Prof. Dr. K S Anil Kumar v State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP(C) 42287/ 2025
The Kerala High Court has recently (November 11) admitted the petition of the Registrar of Kerala University, seeking revocation of Suspension following the Syndicate decision to revoke his suspension in the meeting convened on November 1, 2025.
Justice N Nagaresh has admitted the petition and issued notice to the respondents.
The petitioner, who has been suspended since July, 2025, has submitted in his petition that he has not been issued any charge sheet or informed of any disciplinary action being initiated except for a reference to it in an order issued by the Vice Chancellor.
Case Title: Sunil Kumar K and Anr v Union of India and Ors. and connected cases
Case No: WA 453/ 2021 and connected cases
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (November 11) pulled up Competent Authority under Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 (BUDS Act) for its continued inaction and non-compliance with court directives in the proceedings related to the Popular Finance unregulated deposit scam, estimated to have defrauded around 30,000 investors of nearly ₹2,000 crore.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and Justice K.V. Jayakumar, while hearing a batch of writ appeals, expressed strong displeasure in the continued non-compliance of the orders issued by the Court.
'Better To Approach SC': Kerala High Court To State On Plea To Defer SIR; Reserves Order
Case Title: State of Kerala v. The Election Commission of India and Ors.
Case No: WP(C) 42591/2025
The Kerala High Court today reserved its order on the State government's plea to defer the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in the State, ahead of elections to Local Self Government Institutions.
During the hearing, Justice V.G. Arun orally expressed disinclination to hear the matter and asked the State to approach the Supreme Court, where similar matters are pending.
Case Title: Joint Director v. The Secretary, TDB and Ors.
Case No: DBAR No. 1 of 2025
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (November 12) directed the reconstitution of a committee formed by the officials of Kerala Water Authority (KWA) and the Travancore Devaswom Board (TDB) to resolve the billing dispute between the two regarding water supplied by KWA to the TDB.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar directed for the inclusion of Chief Engineer, Superintending Engineer, and Executive Engineer of both the institutions to the committee already constituted, which included the Assistant Engineer of Pamba, the Executive Engineers, and the Administrative Officers of TDB and KWA.
Case Title: Suo Motu v. State of Kerala
Case No: WP(C) 7844/2023
The Kerala High Court on Thursday (November 13) directed the State government and local authorities to take steps to inform the public about the facility that permits citizens to alert local authorities via WhatsApp, regarding waste being dumped in any area in the State.
The direction was issued by the Division Bench comprising Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas and Justice Gopinath P., which was specially constituted to monitor waste management in the State in a suo motu petition initiated in the aftermath of the Brahmapuram fire.
Kerala High Court Allows Impleadment Of Multiple Claimants In MSC ELSA 3 Admiralty Suit
Case Title: Elsa 3 Maritime Inc. and Ors. v. Saji Surendran and Ors.
Case No: Adml. Suit No. 14/2025
The Kerala High Court on Monday (November 11) permitted the impleadment of several claimants in the admiralty suit related to the sinking of the vessel MSC ELSA 3 off the Kerala coast earlier this year.
Justice M.A. Abdul Hakhim passed an interim order allowing the impleadment of several claimants in the admiralty suit arising under Part XA of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958, which provides for the limitation of liability of shipowners in maritime incidents.
Case Title: Hashim v. State Police Chief and Ors.
Case No: WP (Crl.) No. 1261 of 2025
The Kerala High Court on Friday (November 14) pulled up the District Police Chief, Thiruvananthapuram, for the inaction to trace out the accused persons in a case alleging misappropriation of ₹40 lakhs belonging to a client by his lawyer, and her husband.
The Court had earlier given an interim direction to the Station House Officer, Negumangad (5th respondent), to conduct a thorough investigation in the case and the District Police Chief (3rd respondent) to monitor the same.
Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath had earlier expressed displeasure regarding the investigation.
Case Title: Adv. Shani A.R. and Ors. v. Bar Council of Kerala and Anr.
Case No: WP(C) 42845/2025
The Kerala High Court on Friday (November 14) sought the State Bar Council's stand while considering a plea preferred by seven lawyers challenging 'excess' fees charged by the body to conduct their enrolments.
Justice V.G. Arun today gave time to the standing counsel to take instructions from the Bar Council of Kerala (BCK) regarding the same.
Case Title: Rithisha Rithu v. UGC and Ors.
Case No: WP(C) 29583/2025
The Kerala High Court on Friday (November 14) passed an interim direction to the National Testing Agency (NTA) to carry out correction in a transgender woman's certificate awarding her Junior Research Fellowship, so as to incorporate her self-identified, official name in it.
The plea before Justice V.G. Arun was by Rithisha Rithu, the first transgender woman in Kerala to be admitted into a Ph.D. programme.
Case Title: S Jayasree v State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: Bail Appl. 13835/ 2025
The Kerala High Court has granted interim protection from arrest to the former Secretary of the Travancore Devaswom Board (TDB), who stands arrayed as the fourth accused in Sabarimala Gold theft case.
Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath passed the interim order.
Case Title: Sakhi Women's Resource Center v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP(C) 38649/2025
The Kerala High Court on Friday (November 14) gave an interim direction to the Secretary of the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA), Thiruvananthapuram to carry out an independent assessment of the facilities available at the Women's Central Prison, Poojappura (Thiruvananthapuram) and to submit a report with details of the inspection.
Justice V.G. Arun was considering a plea preferred by Sakhi Women's Resource Centre, a non-profit organization, challenging the government order (Exhibit P1) that proposed to shift the inmates of the Women's Prison and Correctional Home, Attakulangara, Thiruvananthapuram to the Old Women's block of the Central Prison, Poojappura.
Case Title: Directorate of Enforcement v State of Kerala
Case No: Crl. M C 10327/ 2025
The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) has approached the Kerala High Court challenging a Ranni Magistrate Court order that refused to issue certified copies of the FIR and First Information Statement (FIS) in the Sabarimala gold theft case.
The petition invokes Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and argues that the refusal has obstructed the agency's statutory mandate under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002.
Union Opposes Trans Man's Plea To Preserve Eggs; Says ART Act Does Not Cover Transgender Persons
Case Title: Hari Devageeth v Union of India
Case No: WP(C) 5306/2025
The Union Government has told the Kerala High Court that a trans man cannot seek the benefit of assisted reproductive technologies under the Assisted Reproductive Technology Regulation Act 2021, asserting that transgender persons are outside the statutory framework of the law. The stand was taken in a counter affidavit filed in response to a writ petition by a 28-year-old person, assigned female at birth and identifying as a man, seeking permission to cryopreserve his eggs before undergoing gender-affirming surgery.