Nominal Index

Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 418

All Kerala Akshaya Entrepreneurs Confederation v. State of Kerala and Ors. and Moideen v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 419

Kiran P.S. v. State of Kerala and connected cases, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 420

Tomcy Thomas v State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 421

Addl. R4 G.R. Ajith v Kerala Police Association, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 422

Dr. Reni Philip and Anr. v Suvarnarajendran and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 423

Lenin Raj v. State of Kerala and connected cases, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 424

M/S Asianet News Network Pvt Ltd and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 425

Midhun M. v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 426

Suo Motu JPP v State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 427

State of Kerala and Ors. v. Ranjith K. and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 428

N v State of Kerala and Ors. and connected case, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 429

Arjun A. v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 430

N v. R, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 431

A and Ors. v. Station House Officer and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 432

Vironi Augustine v. Joseph, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 433

N. Prakash v. The Advocate General and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 434

Thomas v. K.K. Mohanan, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 435

Sabu Stephen v. Union of India, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 436

X v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 437

Dr. Kirit Somaiya v. Ziqitza Health Care Ltd. and Anr. and connected case, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 438

Save A Family Plan India v. Union of India and Ors. & Kerala Social Service Forum v. Union of India and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 439

Cleetus E.P. v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 440

Simy S. v. Bar Council of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 441

Fr. Thomas Pulayath v. St. Tomas Orthodox Syrian Church Cherukkunnam and connected matters, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 442

The St. Joseph's Boys Higher Secondary School v. The State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 443

State of Kerala and Anr. v. Harishkumar and Anr. & connected case, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 444

Adarsh S.R. v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 445

Srimad Samyamindra Thirtha Swamiji v. Raghavendra Thirtha Swami, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 446

Mammen Mathew and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 447

X v. X and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 448

Tharun Moorthi and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 449

A.T. George v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 450

Peter T.V v District Police Chief, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 451

Jaseela C v Sriram Venkittaraman and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 452

P. Gopalakrishnan alias Dileep v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 453

Joseph Palackatharayil Varughese v. The Public Information Officer and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 454

ESI Corporation v. Mohandas, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 455

X v. Union of India and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 456

Akhila P.R and Anr. v State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 457

M/S Hotel Palace Inn, Angamaly v Town Brethren Assembly, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 458

BRD Finance Ltd. v Santhosh P and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 459

Ahamed Junaid P.S. v. Union of India and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 460

K.B. Sumod v. State of Kerala and Ors. & Narayanankutty K. and Ors. v. The Cochin Devaswom Board and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 461

Simi Bell Rose John v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 462

Arun K. Thomas v. Narcotic Control Bureau & connected cases, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 463

Lulu Hyper Market Pvt. Ltd v. The District Collector and Ors. & connected case, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 464

Muhammed Ashfaq C. v. Union of India and connected cases, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 465

Ernakulam Thirumala Devaswom and Ors. v. The Cochin Devaswom Board, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 466

Abdul Basith Kurikkalakath v. Shafi Mohammed @ Shafi Mohamed Khalid and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 467

Krishnapriya M. v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 Livelaw (Ker) 468

U v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 469

X v. X. and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 470

X v. Union of India and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 471

Murukan S v State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 472

Light House Marine Service India Pvt. Ltd. v Charterer and Parties Interested in the Vessel MT Ocean Faye, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 473

Rakesh Kallampadath v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 474

Wildlife Warden and Ors. v. Thadathil Saramma and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 475

Fousiya and Anr. v State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 476

Abdul Rauf M. v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 477

Nirmal Mathew Babu v State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 478

Shajitha V.P. and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 479

Judgments/ Orders This Month

Kerala High Court Asks Guruvayur Devaswom To Consider Re-Naming Ritual Named After Court

Case Title: Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 Live Law (Ker) 418

The Kerala High Court recently asked the Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee to consider renaming its 'kodathi vilakku' event in the temple as it may be mistaken to have some endorsement by the judiciary.

The event is organized by the advocates practicing in Chavakkad Court and conducted during Ekadashi festival in Guruvayur temple.

The Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar, however, refused to ban the event.

Reservation For Women, Persons With Disabilities Not Mandatory In Allotment Of Akshaya Centres: Kerala High Court

Case Titles: All Kerala Akshaya Entrepreneurs Confederation v. State of Kerala and Ors. and Moideen v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 419

The Kerala High Court recently held that the government need not provide reservation to women or differently-abled persons while allotting Akshaya Centres as there are no legal provisions mandating the same.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas reasoned that allotment of Akshaya Centres is a contractual arrangement and since no government employment is provided, there is no legal mandate to provide reservation as per the Constitution or the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act (RPwD Act), 2016.

ED Officials Attack: Kerala High Court Grants Bail To Nine Accused

Case Titles: Kiran P.S. v. State of Kerala and connected cases

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 420

The Kerala High Court on Monday (August 3) granted regular bail to nine accused in the crime registered pursuant to the attack on Enforcement Directorate officials.

The case refers to the alleged attack on ED officials and damage to vehicles following an ED search operation at the residence of Opposition Leader Of Kerala, Pinarayi Vijayan and his daughter on May 27.

Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath allowed pleas preferred by 9 accused, namely, Kiran P.S., Jeevan, Anil Kumar, Sreejith, Nishad, Sidarth S., Shefeek, Nandhu G.R., Rahul A. Rajan.

'Prima Facie' Case Of Harbouring Offender: Kerala High Court Upholds FIR Against Priest For Aiding Woman Impersonating A Lawyer

Case Title: Fr. Tomcy Thomas v State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 421

The Kerala High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings against a priest charged with aiding a woman who allegedly forged an advocate's enrolment certificate and practised as a lawyer, holding that the materials collected during investigation prima facie make out an offence of 'harboring' under Section 212 IPC.

Justice A Badharudeen delivered the judgment.

Kerala High Court Refuses To Entertain Appeal Against Stay On Reorganization Of Police Associations In State

Case Title: Addl. R4 G.R. Ajith v Kerala Police Association

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 422

The Kerala High Court on Monday (03 August) refused to interfere with a Single Judge's decision staying the operation of a government order that restructures the police personnel associations in the State.

The Division Bench comprising Justice A.K. Jaysankaran Nambiar and Justice Preeta A.K refused to stay the Single Judge's order.

Kerala High Court Rejects Doctors' Challenge To Expert Panel Opinion On Medical Negligence; Says It's Only Evidence, Not Verdict

Case Title: Dr. Reni Philip and Anr. v Suvarnarajendran and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 423

The Kerala High Court has held that reports submitted by the State Level Apex Body investigating complaints against doctors are only pieces of expert evidence and do not amount to findings of criminal negligence.

A Division Bench comprising Dr. Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Preeta A.K was considering two doctors' writ appeal challenging a Single Judge order that refused to interfere with an expert panel's report expressing a prima facie opinion of gross medical negligence.

ED Officials Attack: Kerala High Court Grants Bail To Six More Accused

Case Titles: Lenin Raj v. State of Kerala and connected cases

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 424

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (August 4) granted regular bail to four CPI(M) workers, who were arrested for being allegedly involved in the attack against officials of the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath passed the order granting bail to Lenin Raj, Amal S.P., Vaisakh and Rahul.

The Court granted on Wednesday (August 5) granted bail to Nidin Raj and Shahin.

News Channel Not Criminally Liable For Merely Airing Press Conference Containing 'Defamatory' Words: Kerala High Court Grants Relief To Asianet

Case Title: M/S Asianet News Network Pvt Ltd and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 425

The Kerala High Court recently quashed the criminal case registered against Asianet News, its Bureau Chief and, its Editor, booked for defamation, for allegedly publishing defamatory content in a press conference aired by the channel.

Justice C.S. Dias delivered the judgment.

Kerala High Court Asks Magistrate To Proceed With Complaint Against 5 Cops Accused Of Assaulting Army Personnel, Defers Sanction Issue

Case Title: Midhun M. v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 426

The Kerala High Court recently directed the Magistrate Court, Chittoor to proceed against five policemen, who allegedly beat up Indian Army sepoy, during Kollemgode Temple 'Aaraattu' festival in 2019.

Justice G. Girish directed that the question of requirement of sanction can be considered at a later stage, after the completion of evidence.

Online Publication Of Interim Orders Does Not Constitute Service; No Contempt Until Order Is Communicated: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Suo Motu JPP v State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 427

The Kerala High Court has recently clarified that mere online publication of interim orders does not constitute legal service of the order upon the affected parties. It further directed that all court orders, including interim orders, should be uploaded preferably on the same day they are pronounced.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M passed the order in a suo motu judicial practice and procedure proceeding initiated by the High Court to streamline court administration and electronic case management.

Performers Of Taekwondo 'Poomsae' Also Eligible For Sports Quota Govt Appointment : Kerala High Court

Case Title: State of Kerala and Ors. v. Ranjith K. and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 428

The Kerala High Court recently upheld an order of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal (KAT) that found that Taekwondo Poomsae is also a recognized event for government appointments under the sports quota.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishnan dismissed the challenge made by the State (petitioners) against the KAT order granting relief to the applicant therein, a Taekwondo Poomsae champion.

Contractual Women Employees Entitled To Hysterectomy Leave Under Kerala Service Rules: High Court

Case Title: N v State of Kerala and Ors. and connected case

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 429

The Kerala High Court has held that women employed on a contractual basis under State-funded projects cannot be denied medical leave benefits for hysterectomy merely because Rule 101A of the Kerala Service Rules (KSR) has not been expressly extended to contractual employees.

Justice Harisankar V. Menon delivered the judgment while allowing two writ petitions filed by Special Educators (Secondary) engaged on contract under Samagra Shiksha Kerala, who had sought medical leave following hysterectomy surgeries.

Kerala High Court Denies Pre-Arrest Bail To Man Booked For 'Threatening' Social Media Posts Against Police Officer & Family

Case Title: Arjun A. v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 430

The Kerala High Court recently denied bail to Arjun A., who had allegedly threatened Kothamangalam SHO on social media and had sent sexually explicit messages to his family members.

Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath remarked that the accusation against Arjun was serious and that pre-arrest bail cannot be granted as a matter of course.

Does Wife Asking For Separate Residence From Husband's Family Amount To Cruelty? Kerala High Court Answers

Case Title: N v. R

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 431

The Kerala High Court recently held that a wife demanding separate residence away from husband's family without sufficient reason would amount to cruelty.

The Division Bench of Justice Satish Ninan and Justice P. Krishna Kumar delivered the judgment.

Acid Attack Victims Must Be Compensated Irrespective Of Fine Imposed On Offender: Kerala High Court

Case Title: A and Ors. v. Station House Officer and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 432

The Kerala High Court recently gave relief to acid attack victims by holding that victims must be given compensation whether or not a fine has been imposed on the offender.

Justice Jobin Sebastian clarified that compensation payable as per the Victim Compensation Scheme in accordance with Section 357A Cr.P.C. is in addition to the fine awarded to the offender under Section 357.

'Wholly Unwarranted': Kerala High Court Criticizes Trial Court's Adverse Observations About Lawyer's Drafting Skills

Case Title: Vironi Augustine v. Joseph

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 433

The Kerala High Court recently criticized a trial court's adverse observations regarding the skills of a lawyer in drafting a petition before it.

Justice Easwaran S. opined that trial court's remarks about the lawyer's competence was completely uncalled for and the same required judicial scrutiny.

Plea Before Kerala High Court Seeking Removal Of 'High Court' Nameplates From Govt Lawyers' Cars Withdrawn

Case Title: N. Prakash v. The Advocate General and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 434

A plea has been moved before the Kerala High Court seeking a direction for removal of the Court's name from the designation boards in the cars of government pleaders and central government counsels.

When the matter came up on Friday (August 7) before Justice Murali Purushothaman, the petitioner appearing in person sought permission to withdraw the case. Accordingly, the plea was dismissed as withdrawn.

Mediated Settlement Agreement Between Landlord & Tenant For Payment Of Rent Arrears Is Executable: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Thomas v. K.K. Mohanan

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 435

The Kerala High Court recently held that a compromise agreement entered into between a landlord and a tenant regarding payment of arrears of rent during a court-referred mediation is executable before a civil court having pecuniary jurisdiction.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. observed that the compromise agreement is in the nature of a decree passed by the Lok Adalat as per Section 21 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 and that when it is recorded in the rent control court's order, the same also partakes the character of an executable decree.

Kerala High Court Urges Govt To Consider Special Welfare Measures For Living Freedom Fighters, Directs Creation Of Data Portal

Case Title: Sabu Stephen v. Union of India

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 436

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (11 August) urged the Centre and State Government to consider creating a special welfare measures for living freedom fighters, in recognition of their contributions and sacrifices during India's freedom struggle.

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M issued the direction in a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking measures for the welfare and recognition of freedom fighters who are still alive.

Mother Can't Settle POCSO Case Registered Against Father For Sexually Assaulting Minor Daughter: Kerala High Court

Case Title: X v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 437

The Kerala High Court recently observed that the mother of a minor cannot settle or compromise the criminal case initiated against the father for sexually assaulting or sexually harassing their minor daughter.

Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath denied bail to a man, who was arrested for sexually assaulting his minor daughter, and refused to accept that the case has been compromised.

Ambulance Scam Defamation Case: Kerala High Court Sets Aside ₹5L Award Against BJP Leader Kirit Somaiya, Remands Case

Case Title: Dr. Kirit Somaiya v. Ziqitza Health Care Ltd. and Anr. and connected case

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 438

The Kerala High Court has set aside the ₹5 lakhs compensation awarded to Ravi Krishna, who is the son of former Minister of Overseas Indian Affairs, and his company in the defamation suit filed against BJP leader Dr. Kirit Somaiya relating to the Ambulance Scam.

The Division Bench of Justice Satish Ninan and Justice P. Krishna Kumar remanded the suit to the trial court for fresh consideration after noting that the trial court did not consider many subsequent developments and the documentary evidence relied upon by Somaiya.

NGO Funding Peaceful Protests Can't Be Ground To Deny Its FCRA Renewal: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Save A Family Plan India v. Union of India and Ors. & Kerala Social Service Forum v. Union of India and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 439

The Kerala High Court recently came to the aid of two NGOs, whose FCRA renewal applications were rejected by the Centre relying on a report of the Central Security Agency (Intelligence Bureau) alleging that they 'funded' the protests at Vizhinjam Port.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas noted that there were no materials to show that NGOs had funded the protests, and added that even if they had, in fact, done so, that cannot be a ground to reject FCRA renewal:

“the report has not even identified any financial trail between the petitioner and any of the protestors directly…even if it is assumed that the petitioner had funded the peaceful protests, still, can it be held to be a reason to deny renewal of the certificate? The answer has to be in the negative. The right to protest is an integral part of a democracy. Every citizen has the right to demonstrate or to protest in a peaceful manner. The said right emanates from the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India.”

No Motor Vehicle Tax On Vehicle Rendered Unroadworthy After Accident, Even If Owner Failed To Intimate Authorities: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Cleetus E.P. v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 440

The Kerala High Court has held that motor vehicle tax cannot be imposed for a period during which a vehicle was neither used nor kept for use on the road because it had become completely unroadworthy, even if the registered owner failed to submit the prescribed advance intimation in 'G Form' under Kerala Motor Taxation Rules.

Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A., was delivering the judgment in a writ petition filed by a carriage owner whose vehicle became unfit to use in road pursuant to a road accident.

'Calculated, Fraudulent Attempt': Kerala High Court Raps Former Bar Council Office-Bearers For Fabricating Records To Remove Secretary

Case Title: Simy S. v. Bar Council of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 441

The Kerala High Court came down heavily upon the Bar Council of Kerala (BCK) and the erstwhile committees which were managing the body for adopting fraudulent means to fire the BCK Secretary.

Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. was considering a petition filed by Simy S., who was holding the post of BCK Secretary, when was relieved from duty despite submission of withdrawal of her resignation.

Police Protection Can't Be Used To Enforce Church Possession Rights Not Adjudicated By Civil Court: Kerala High Court In Malankara-Jacobite Dispute

Case Title: Fr. Thomas Pulayath v. St. Tomas Orthodox Syrian Church Cherukkunnam and connected matters

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 442

The Kerala High Court on Thursday (August 13) held that police protection cannot be used to enforce a claimed right to possession of church properties where that right has not been adjudicated by a competent civil court.

Allowing seven writ appeals arising from the Malankara-Jacobite church dispute, the Division Bench of Dr Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Preetha A.K. set aside Single Bench orders granting police protection to vicars and parishioners of the Orthodox faction and issuing consequential directions regarding possession of the churches and performing religious rites.

No Disciplinary Proceedings To Terminate Aided School Teacher Who 'Abandoned' Service To Continue Foreign Job: Kerala High Court

Case Title: The St. Joseph's Boys Higher Secondary School v. The State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 443

The Kerala High Court recently clarified that there is no need for disciplinary proceedings to terminate an aided school teacher, who refused to rejoin service even after the expiry of sanctioned leave in order to continue foreign employment.

Justice Harisankar V. Menon observed that disciplinary proceedings are not required in such cases since refusal to rejoin service amounts to 'abandonment'.

ED Officials Attack: Kerala High Court Refuses To Cancel Bail Granted To Accused Harishkumar But Imposes New Condition

Case Title: State of Kerala and Anr. v. Harishkumar and Anr. & connected case

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 444

The Kerala High Court on Thursday (August 13) refused to cancel the bail granted to Harishkumar, the 9th accused in the crime registered pursuant to the attack on Enforcement Directorate (ED) officials following a raid at the residence of Opposition Leader Pinarayi Vijayan and his daughter on May 27.

After hearing the parties, Justice C.S. Dias was of the view that the afore order (Annexure A3) need not be cancelled since the other accused in the case were already granted regular bail by the High Court.

Kerala High Court Closes PIL Challenging Alleged Ban On Men's Entry At 'Freedom At Midnight' Event

Case Title: Adarsh S.R. v. State of Kerala and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 445

The Kerala High Court on Thursday (13 August) closes a public interest litigation challenging the proposed “Freedom at Midnight” event organised by the Department for Women and Child Development on August 14.

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M observed that the petition was founded on unverified press reports and that the petitioner had not first approached the concerned authority with his grievance.

Successor To Decree Holder Can Continue Execution Without Prior Substitution Before Court That Passed Decree: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Srimad Samyamindra Thirtha Swamiji v. Raghavendra Thirtha Swami

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 446

The Kerala High Court has held that a person who succeeds to the rights in the property forming the subject matter of a decree need not first seek substitution before the court that passed the decree. Instead, such a successor may directly continue execution proceedings before the executing court by invoking Section 146 CPC read with the Explanation to Order XXI Rule 16 CPC.

Justice Easwaran S. delivered the judgment in an Original Petition arising from a litigation involving the Kashi Math Samsthan.

Journalist's News Report Causing Embarrassment Doesn't By Itself Constitute Criminal Defamation: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Mammen Mathew and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 447

The Kerala High Court has recently held that a journalist would not be criminally liable for the offence of defamation for reporting on the arrest and registration of crime against a person.

Justice C.S. Dias referred to Sections 499 [Defamation], 501 [Printing or engraving matter known to be defamatory] and 502 [Sale of printed or engraved substance containing defamatory matter] of the Indian Penal Code, and observed:

“The distinction between a report of an official proceeding and an independent defamatory assertion is crucial. A journalist does not become criminally liable for defamation because the publication of an official action has caused reputational harm to a litigant. What the aforesaid Sections penalise is not truthful reporting as such, but a culpable defamatory imputation of the kind contemplated by the provision…An adverse publication, or one which causes embarrassment to the person concerned, does not by itself constitute criminal defamation.”

'To Preserve Confidence In Justice', Kerala High Court Transfers Family Court Case Over Litigant's Apprehension Of Bias

Case Title: X v. X and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 448

The Kerala High Court recently permitted a case to be transferred from one Family Court to another after a litigant raised an issue of bias.

Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. reserved opinion regarding the correctness of the allegation and observed that the case is being transferred only with a view to preserve the litigant's faith in the judiciary.

Mohanlal-Starrer 'Athimanoharam' Can't Be Shot Inside Periyar Tiger Reserve, Kerala High Court Told

Case Title: Tharun Moorthi and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 449

The Kerala High Court on Monday (August 17) disposed of a plea preferred by the makers of the Mohanlal-starrer Malayalam film 'Athimanoharam' seeking a direction to the Forest Department officials to consider their request to permit film shooting in Pamba and Sannidhanam.

The Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar yesterday took note of the submission made by the Special Government Pleader for Forests that the Deputy Director, Periyar Tiger Reserve (Periyar Wildlife Division), had rejected the request.

2015 Kerala Assembly Ruckus: High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Former Congress MLA A.T. George

Case Title: A.T. George v. State of Kerala and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 450

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (August 18) quashed the criminal proceedings against former Congress MLA A.T. George in the 2015 Kerala Legislative Assembly Ruckus case.

Justice C.S. Dias noted that a coordinate Bench had already quashed the proceedings against the other accused in the case, including Congress MLAs M.A. Vaheed [1st accused], Dominic Presentation, and K. Sivadasan Nair.

Pendency Of Criminal Case No Ground To Deny Police Clearance Certificate: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Peter T.V v District Police Chief

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 451

The Kerala High Court has held that a police clearance certificate under Section 59 of the Kerala Police Act, 2011 need not be denied to a person merely due to pendency of a criminal case. It added that a certificate can be issued by incorporating a statement regarding the involvement of the applicant in the crime.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas issued the order in a petition seeking directions for issuance of a Police clearance certificate.

2019 Rash Driving Case: Kerala High Court Defers Trial Against IAS Officer Sriram Venkitaraman To Facilitate Appointment Of Special Prosecutor

Case Title: Jaseela C v Sriram Venkittaraman and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 452

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (18 August) deferred trial proceedings in the 2019 rash driving case against IAS officer Sriram Venkitaraman, for a period of one month.

Justice C.S. Dias passed the order in a petition filed by widow of journalist K.M. Basheer who was killed when a vehicle allegedly driven by Venkitaraman ran over him at high speed, at Museum Junction in Thiruvananthapuram in 2019.

Actress Rape Case: Kerala High Court Closes Dileep's Plea Alleging Media Trial After Probe In All 5 Cases Completed

Case Title: P. Gopalakrishnan alias Dileep v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 453

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (August 18) closed the plea preferred by actor Dileep seeking action against Indo-Asian News Channel Private Limited/Reporter TV for allegedly publishing trial details relating to the 2017 Actress Assault case.

When the matter came up before Justice Jobin Sebastian today, Dileep's counsel told that the purpose of the plea has been served after the investigating agency filed final reports in all 5 crimes.

Approved Building Plan Not 'Personal Information', Can Be Disclosed To RTI Applicant: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Joseph Palackatharayil Varughese v. The Public Information Officer and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 454

The Kerala High Court has held that a building plan approved by a local body would not constitute 'personal information' as per the Right to Information Act (RTI Act) and can, therefore, be disclosed to an RTI applicant.

Justice Murali Purushothaman delivered the judgment.

Failure To Follow Binding Precedents Gives Rise To Substantial Question Of Law In ESI Act Appeals: Kerala High Court

Case Title: ESI Corporation v. Mohandas

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 455

The Kerala High Court recently held that a failure to follow binding precedents by the Employees' Insurance courts would give rise to a substantial question of law in ESI appeals.

The Bench of Justice S. Manu held:

“the EI Court has not analysed the dispute in tune with the law laid down in the judgment referred above and hence the impugned judgment cannot be sustained. Failure to follow the law laid down in the binding judgments give rise to a substantial question of law…”

Christian Women Can File For Divorce At Their Place Of Residence: Kerala High Court

Case Title: X v. Union of India and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 456

In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court has held that as per Section 3 of the Divorce Act, Christian women can file for divorce in their places of residence.

The Division Bench of Dr. Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Preeta A.K. was considering an appeal filed by a wife after the Single Bench rejected her plea seeking a declaration that Section 3(3) of the Divorce Act ought to be read in a manner so that jurisdictional courts for filing petitions under the Act would also include the court within whose territorial limits the wife resides.

'Speculative Litigation': Kerala High Court Dismisses PIL Against Free-Bus Travel Scheme For Women, Transgender Persons

Case Title: Akhila P.R and Anr. v State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 457

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (18 August) dismissed a Public Interest Litigation against Priyadarshini free-bus scheme as “speculative litigation” and lacking material linking accidents to overcrowding.

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M dismissed the petition.

Brethren Assembly Hall Is A 'Church' Under Kerala Liquor Rules; Bar Distance Restrictions Apply: High Court

Case Title: M/S Hotel Palace Inn, Angamaly v Town Brethren Assembly

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 458

The Kerala High Court has held that an Assembly hall of the Brethren Christian denomination qualifies as a “church” under Rule 13(3) of the Foreign Liquor Rules, 1953, thereby attracting the statutory distance restriction on grant of bar licences.

A Division Bench of Justice K. Natarajan and Justice Johnson John dismissed an appeal filed by Hotel Palace Inn, Angamaly, and its managing partner, and upheld the finding of a single judge that the Town Brethren Assembly Hall at Angamaly is a church for the purposes of the Rules.

Civil Court Lacks Jurisdiction To Try Commercial Dispute Of Specified Value After Designation Of Commercial Courts: Kerala High Court

Case Title: BRD Finance Ltd. v Santhosh P and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 459

The Kerala High Court has held that once notification is issued by the State constituting sub Courts as Commercial Courts for recovery of a specified amount, the Civil Courts cannot proceed to adjudicate the matter on merits.

Justice Easwaran S was delivering the judgment in a Regular Second Appeal filed by BRD Finance Ltd. against judgments of the Munsiff Court, Chavakkad and the Sub Court, Chavakkad.

Kerala High Court Upholds Infant Vaccination Rule For ₹6,000 Maternity Benefit Under PMMVY Scheme

Case Title: Ahamed Junaid P.S. v. Union of India and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 460

The Kerala High Court recently upheld the infant vaccination as a condition for lactating mothers to get monetary benefit of Rs. 6000 for second girl child under the Pradhan Mantri Matru Vandana Yojana (PMMVY) Scheme.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas delivered the judgment.

'Shocked': Kerala High Court Criticizes Cochin Devaswom Board For Spending ₹28 Lakh Funds On Commissioner's Comforts

Case Title: K.B. Sumod v. State of Kerala and Ors. & Narayanankutty K. and Ors. v. The Cochin Devaswom Board and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 461

The Kerala High Court recently expressed shock over the unauthorised spending of around Rs. 28 lakhs of public money by the Cochin Devaswom Board for the comforts of its Devaswom Commissioner, who bought a new car and other luxuries in violation of government norms and guidelines.

Criticising the Board, the Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar observed:

“has incurred an expenditure to the tune of Rs.28,44,313/- from the Devaswom funds within a short period for the repairs of the residential quarter, purchase of vehicle and purchase of household articles for an Officer, who was appointed on a deputation basis for a limited period, that too, violating the Rules and Regulations….”

Kerala High Court Dismisses Expelled Congress Leader Simi Bell Rose John's Police Protection Plea Against CM VD Satheesan

Case Title: Simi Bell Rose John v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 462

The Kerala High Court has dismissed the police protection plea preferred by expelled Congress leader Simi Bell Rose John against Chief Minister V.D. Satheesan and his brother, V.D. Ajayakumar.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas observed that Simi has not pointed out any materials to show that her life or property were under threat from the Chief Minister (5th respondent) or his brother (4th respondent).

24-Hour Clock For Production Runs From Formal Arrest Where Pre-Arrest Detention Is Statutorily Authorised: Kerala High Court Issues Guidelines

Case Title: Arun K. Thomas v. Narcotic Control Bureau & connected cases

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 463

The Kerala High Court has issued a slew of guidelines that must be followed upon the arrest of persons in order to safeguard their constitutional and statutory rights.

Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath, while considering a batch of bail applications, further clarified that an accused has to be produced before the Magistrate only within 24 hours of formal arrest, and not actual physical custody, if pre-arrest detention is permitted by law.

Kerala High Court Orders Reconsideration Of Lulu Hypermarket Land Conversion After RDO Skipped Mandatory Agricultural Officer Report

Case Title: Lulu Hyper Market Pvt. Ltd v. The District Collector and Ors. & connected case

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 464

The Kerala High Court recently upheld a Single Bench decision, which quashed the Revenue Divisional Officer's orders reclassifying the land owned by Lulu Hyper Market Pvt. Ltd. in Thrissur and permitting its commercial use.

The Division Bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice Basant Balaji agreed that the RDO did not follow the procedure under Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act and Rules, which mandates RDO to call for a report from the Agricultural Officer before deciding a Form-5 application for deletion of land from the Data Bank.

Arrest Grounds Must Be Communicated To Arrestee, Relative Before Production Before Magistrate For Transit Remand: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Muhammed Ashfaq C. v. Union of India and connected cases

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 465

The Kerala High Court has held that arrest of a person would be vitiated if the arrestee's relative/friend/nominated person is not informed of the arrest grounds when first produced before the nearest, non-jurisdictional magistrate for transit remand.

Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath observed:

“when a person who is arrested is brought before a non-jurisdictional Magistrate even if only for the purpose of ordering a transit or transit remand, it is imperative that the grounds of arrest be communicated both to the aresstee and to his relative or friend, as mandated under Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Sections 47 and 48 of the BNSS, prior to such production.”

Power Of Devaswom Board To Assume Management Of A Religious Institution 'Not Unfettered': Kerala High Court

Case Title: Ernakulam Thirumala Devaswom and Ors. v. The Cochin Devaswom Board

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 466

The Kerala High Court has held that the power of a Devaswom Board to assume the management of an institution under the Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950 is not an unfettered one and can be exercised only in the circumstances specifically contemplated in the Act.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K. V. Jayakumar was delivering the judgment in a petition challenging two communications issued by the Cochin Devaswom Board in February 2017.

Judgment Debtor's Wife's Personal Properties Can't Be Attached Even If Property Gifted To Her To Defeat Decree Holder's Claim: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Abdul Basith Kurikkalakath v. Shafi Mohammed @ Shafi Mohamed Khalid and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 467

The Kerala High Court has held that the personal properties of a judgment debtor's wife cannot be attached in an execution petition even if she knew that her husband gifted his property to her in order to defeat the decree holder's claim.

Justice Easwaran S. clarified that in such circumstances, the decree holder would not be rendered remediless and he can apply for vitiating the fraudulent gifting by making an application as per Section 53 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.

Four-Attempt Cap In First-Year MBBS Exams Includes Both Regular And Supplementary Exams: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Krishnapriya M. v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 Livelaw (Ker) 468

The Kerala High Court has held that four attempts cap in the First Professional MBBS Degree Examination includes both regular and supplementary exams.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas delivered the judgment in a petition filed by a first year MBBS student.

The petitioner joined the MBBS course in the year 2023 and has not been able to clear the first year MBBS as she failed in three subjects. The first professional MBBS course has to be completed within four attempts in four years and the petitioner has already completed four attempts yet has not been able to clear the subjects.

Father Not In Charge Of Child Can't Be Prosecuted For Cruelty Under Juvenile Justice Act Over Non-Payment Of Maintenance: Kerala High Court

Case Title: U v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 469

The Kerala High Court recently quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against a father, who was working abroad, accused of the offence under Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (JJ) Act for failing to provide for the basic needs and maintenance of his child.

Justice Jobin Sebastian observed that the offence was not attracted since the father was not in actual charge of or in control over the child.

Muslim Man Having Sexual Intercourse With Minor Wife Liable Under POCSO Act: Kerala High Court

Case Title: X v. X. and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 470

The Kerala High Court recently clarified that a Muslim man having sexual intercourse with his wife, who is aged below 18 years, is liable under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act).

Justice Jobin Sebastian held:

“sexual intercourse with a girl below eighteen years of age attracts the offences under the POCSO Act, and in such a situation, whether the child is the wife of the accused or not is of little consequence…Undisputedly, the provisions of the POCSO Act apply if one of the parties to the marriage is a minor, irrespective of the validity or otherwise of the marriage under personal law.”

Production Of Divorce Decree Not Essential To Delete Former Spouse's Name From Passport: Kerala High Court

Case Title: X v. Union of India and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 471

The Kerala High Court, in a recent decision, held that divorcees need not produce divorce decree or judicial separation order when they apply to change name or delete ex-spouse's name from their passports.

Justice Murali Purushothaman observed that an office memorandum cannot mandate production of a divorce decree when Section IV of the Passport Information Booklet under Schedule III to the Passports Rules, 1980 says this is not needed when divorcees apply for name change/deletion of spouse's name.

Foreign Medical Graduate Entitled To Stipend For Compulsory Internship, Completion Certificate Must Be Issued Without Any Fee: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Murukan S v State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 472

The Kerala High Court has held that issuance of an internship completion certificate to a Foreign Medical Graduate must be done without demanding any internship fee. It further directed to process his claim for payment of stipend for the period of his Compulsory Rotatory Medical Internship (CRMI).

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas issued the direction in a writ petition filed by a Foreign Medical Graduate who had completed his internship at the General Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram.

Common Management Not Enough To Treat Vessels As Sister Ships For Arrest: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Light House Marine Service India Pvt. Ltd. v Charterer and Parties Interested in the Vessel MT Ocean Faye

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 473

The Kerala High Court has held that a vessel cannot be arrested merely because it is managed by the same ship manager against whom a maritime claim has been raised, in the absence of the common ownership required under the Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act, 2017.

Justice M.A. Abdul Hakhim, allowed an application filed by the charterer and parties interested in the vessel MT Ocean Faye and its ship manager, holding that the plaintiff had no right to arrest the vessel in connection with its claim against the ship manager.

Marriage Officer Can't Insist On Nepali Woman's Single Status Certificate To Solemnise Marriage Under SMA: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Rakesh Kallampadath v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 474

The Kerala High Court recently clarified that a marriage officer cannot refuse to solemnize a marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 by citing expired “single status certificate”.

Justice Harisankar V. Menon was considering a writ petition preferred by a man, who was aggrieved by the Marriage Officer's refusal to solemnize his marriage with a Nepali woman.

State Must Adequately Compensate Victims Of Wild Animal Attacks, 1980 Rules Don't Cap Quantum At ₹20K: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Wildlife Warden and Ors. v. Thadathil Saramma and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 475

The Kerala High Court recently held that State is liable to give just compensation to victims of wild animal attacks and that the quantum of compensation payable is not limited to Rs. 20,000 as per the Kerala Rules for Payment of Compensation to Victims of Attack by Wild Animals, 1980.

Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. dismissed a regular second appeal filed by the Forest department officials challenging concurrent findings of the courts below granting compensation in a suit for damages.

Wife's Past Kidney Donation Can't Be Ground To Reject Husband's Kidney Donation Application: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Fousiya and Anr. v State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 476

The Kerala High Court has held that an application for permission to donate a kidney cannot be rejected merely because the proposed donor's wife had donated a kidney several years earlier.

Justice Harisankar V. Menon was delivering the judgement in a petition challenging the orders passed by the District Level Authorisation Committee for Transplantation of Human Organs, Ernakulam, and the appellate authority, which had rejected an application submitted by a man seeking to donate one of his kidneys to a kidney patient undergoing treatment at Medical Trust Hospital, Ernakulam.

Accused Re-Arrested Without Court Permission After Prior Arrest Was Vitiated Entitled To Bail: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Abdul Rauf M. v. State of Kerala and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 477

The Kerala High Court recently held that bail cannot be denied citing implied permission to re-arrest was given by the Magistrate when no application seeking the same was moved by the investigating officer. [2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 477]

Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath granted bail to an accused, who was re-arrested without prior judicial approval after his earlier arrest was vitiated due to non-communication of grounds of arrest.

RTO Cannot Summon Vehicle Owner Based On Anonymous Rash Driving Complaint: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Nirmal Mathew Babu v State of Kerala and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 478

The Kerala High Court has held that authorities under the Motor Vehicles Act cannot summon or subject a vehicle owner to proceedings on the basis of a concealed complaint alleging rash or dangerous driving, without following the procedure prescribed by law.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas was delivering the judgment in a writ petition seeking protection against harassment by the Regional Transport Officer, Ernakulam.

Former Wife Protected By DV Act Residence Order Can Seek Police Protection, But Can't Oust Husband From His Own House: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Shajitha V.P. and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 479

The Kerala High Court recently granted police protection to a woman, who was sharing a household with her former husband, after obtaining a residence order under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas directed that police protection can be given upon written request since the peculiar living situation might create tensions.