Nominal Index

Reji v State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 480

K.N. Shastry v. Union of India and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 481

Thomas Thomas v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 482

Arjun Ambalapatta v Union of India and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 483

Noushad v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 484

Ansiba Hassan v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 485

V. Balan v State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 486

K. Thankamma v. Moljimol K.S. @ Mol G Mol K.S. and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 487

Aneesh v. Akhil Das, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 488

Habibur Rahman v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 489

Southern Railway and Anr. v. Marymatha Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. & M/s. SVCPL-JVEA v. Marymatha Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 490

Zahid Shanavas v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 491

Geetha and Anr. v. S. Sreejith IPS and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 492

C. Madhavan v. CBI, Dr. S. Anil Kumar v. CBI and Ahmed Suhail v. CBI, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 493

X and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 494

Abdul Kader and Anr. v. Union of India and Anr. & Ashraf @ Asharaf Moulavi v. Union of India and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 495

Archana P.S. and Ors. v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLive (Ker) 496

Firoz Kunnumal and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 497

Sabeena v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 498

Hajara v. The Maintenance Tribunal and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 499

Directorate of Enforcement v. Kolatt Dasan Prathapan, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 500

Rakhul Krishnan v Union of India and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 501

Baby Kurian v The District Collector and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 502

M/s Cubes Entertainments v. Big Tree Entertainment Private Limited and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 503

Pramasivam v. State of Kerala & Siraj Vazhayil @ Saji Thaneerkattil v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 504

X and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 505

Jose M.P. v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 506

Muhammed Jishar v Lakeshore Hospital, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 507

X v. Union of India and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 508

X v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 509

A v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 510

Dr. V. Madhu v. The Chancellor of CUSAT and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 511

M and Anr. v A, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 512

S. Abdul Razzak v C.B. Suraja Devi and Anr, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 513

Balan and Anr. v Parameswaran and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 514

Jiostar India Pvt. Ltd. v. Jollyamma Joseph @ Jolly, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 515

Roji Augustine v State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 516

Dr. P.S. Mahendra Kumar v State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 517

Jayan Vatahakattu Moni v. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 518

Anto Augustine v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 519

Union of India and Ors. v. Santosh Karwade and Anr. and connected case, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 520

Sagesh v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 521

Jisha Thomas v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 522

Kavya K. v. State of Kerala and Anr. & Keerthana K.C. v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 523

Raeesa Parveen v. Union of India and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 524

Amarnath Joshi Surendiran v. Secretary, Bar Council of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 525

K. Surendran v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 526

Raja Varier v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 527

In Re Exorbitant Pricing of Life Saving Patented Medicines, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 528

All India Digital Cable Federation and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 529

A and Anr. v. S, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 530

Mohammed Kasim H.K v. Union Territory of Lakshadweep and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 531

Suo Motu v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 532

Muhammed Nihad @ Thoppi v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 533

Akash M.V and Ors. v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 534

Unaiz Kadumbottil and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 535

Kerala Police Association v. The State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 536

X and Anr. v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 537

George Balu and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Baddevolu Priyanka and Ors. v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 538

Judgments/ Orders This Month

Minor's Relationship With Accused Or Consent Has No Relevance Under POCSO Act: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Reji v State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 480

The Kerala High Court has reiterated that a minor victim's alleged love relationship with the accused, or even consensual sexual intercourse, cannot be relied upon by an accused to escape criminal liability under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).

Justice A. Badharudeen made the observation while dismissing a criminal appeal filed by an accused challenging his conviction and sentence for aggravated sexual assault of a minor.

Kerala High Court Upholds Constitutionality Of Railways' Power To Remove & Prosecute Intoxicated Persons In Trains, Railway Premises

Case Title: K.N. Shastry v. Union of India and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 481

The Kerala High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of Section 145(a) of the Railways Act, 1989 which empowers the railways to remove intoxicated persons from trains or railway premises as well as to prosecute them.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas noted that sufficient procedure has been laid down by the Ministry of Railways in its circular dated 14.09.2023 to avoid any arbitrariness while identifying a person as intoxicated.

Kissing Child's Penis Amounts To Penetrative Sexual Assault Under POCSO Act: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Thomas Thomas v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 482

The Kerala High Court has clarified that kissing a child's penis amounts to penetrative sexual assault as defined under Section 3(d) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act).

Justice A. Badharudeen dismissed an appeal preferred by a convict, who was awarded a 20-year term for kissing a 14 ½ year old boy on two occasions.

NIA Can't Recover Salary Paid To Public Prosecutor During Deputation Based On Later Pay Re-Fixation: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Arjun Ambalapatta v Union of India and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 483

The Kerala High Court has held that National Investigation Agency cannot recover salary paid to public prosecutor during deputation based on later pay re-fixation.

A Division Bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice Basant Balaji made the observation while allowing an Original Petition filed by a person who had served as an Assistant Public Prosecutor under the State of Kerala before being appointed on deputation as Public Prosecutor with the National Investigation Agency (NIA).

Brothel Customer An 'Active Participant' In Commercial Sexual Exploitation, Liable Under Immoral Trafficking Act: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Noushad v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 484

The Kerala High Court has held that a customer visiting a brothel would be criminally liable under Sections 5 and 7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.

The Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar clarified the position of law while answering a reference made by a Single Bench in view of conflicting decisions by Single Benches.

Kerala High Court Directs Fresh Consideration Of Actor Ansiba Hassan's Plea For Police Probe Against Lakshmi Priya Over Sexually Coloured Remarks

Case Title: Ansiba Hassan v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 485

The Kerala High Court has asked the Magistrate to consider afresh the private complaint made by Drishyam actor Ansiba Hassan accusing actor Lakshmi Priya and two CAN Channel representatives of making sexually coloured remarks and circulating objectionable content against her.

Justice Jobin Sebastian was considering Hassan's plea challenging an order of the Magistrate refusing to to direct the police to register an FIR and open an investigation in the complaint.

SC/ST Claimant's Inability To Prove Caste Not Enough To Deny Constitutional Benefits Unless State Shows Contrary Evidence: Kerala High Court

Case Title: V. Balan v State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 486

The Kerala High Court has held that authorities scrutinising caste claims under the Kerala (Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) Regulation of Issue of Community Certificates Act, 1996 cannot insist that members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes discharge the same burden of proof ordinarily expected of citizens when establishing their community identity.

The Division Bench of Dr. Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Preeta A.K. held that the denial of constitutionally guaranteed benefits to members of SC/ST communities must be confined to cases of patent fraud established by independent material available with the State.

Granddaughter Undergoing Studies Availing Loan Can't Be Expected To Maintain Pension-Drawing Grandmother: Kerala High Court

Case Title: K. Thankamma v. Moljimol K.S. @ Mol G Mol K.S. and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 487

Kerala High Court recently held that a granddaughter, who is undergoing studies after availing a student loan, cannot be expected to maintain her pension-drawing grandmother.

Justice Harisankar V. Menon dismissed an octogenarian's plea against her daughter-in-law and granddaughter seeking maintenance from them as per the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.

Court Cannot Refuse To Number Suit With Electronic Signatures Merely Due To Lack Of Resources To Verify Them: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Aneesh v. Akhil Das

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 488

The Kerala High Court held that if the electronic signatures affixed to the plaint and vakalath in a suit complied with the Electronic Filing Rules for Courts (Kerala), 2021, then the Courts cannot refuse to accept it merely because the Court does not have resources to verify the said signatures. 

Justice Easwaran S. issued the direction in an original petition which has challenged the refusal of the Principal Munsiff Court to number a suit since the Court did not have any resource to verify the electronic signature of the parties in the Vakalath.

Married Woman Voluntarily Accompanying Man To Hotel Can't Claim Sexual Relationship Was Induced Solely By Promise Of Marriage: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Habibur Rahman v. State of Kerala and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 489

The Kerala High Court recently quashed a criminal case against a man booked under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for having sexual intercourse with a married woman allegedly on the promise of marriage.

Justice Jobin Sebastian observed:

“a married woman who voluntarily accompanies another man to a hotel room and has sexual intercourse with him cannot, merely on the basis of an allegation of a promise of marriage, contend that the sexual relationship was induced solely by such promise, particularly when her subsisting marriage was not in dispute… In the circumstances of the present case, it cannot be said that the consent for the sexual relationship was induced by any false promise to marry the de facto complainant or by any other deceitful means. Consequently, the materials placed on record do not disclose the commission of an offence under Section 69 of the BNS.”

Kerala High Court Allows K-Rail's JV To Participate In Redevelopment Tender, Criticises Southern Railway For Rejecting Bid Saving ₹25 Crore Public Money

Case Titles: Southern Railway and Anr. v. Marymatha Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. & M/s. SVCPL-JVEA v. Marymatha Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 490

The Kerala High Court has allowed MARYMATHA-KRDCL, a joint venture of K-Rail and Marymatha Infrastructure Private Limited (MIPL), to participate in a tender to re-develop Chengannur Railway Station after the Southern Railways rejected its technical bid on 'hyper-technical' grounds.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. dismissed two writ appeals and upheld the decision of a Single Bench that permitted MIPL to participate in the tender process.

Subsequent Failure To Marry Cannot Retrospectively Render Consensual Relation As Offence Under S.69 BNS: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Zahid Shanavas v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 491

The Kerala High Court has held that a subsequent failure to fulfil a promise of marriage cannot, by itself, retrospectively convert consensual sexual intercourse into a criminal offence under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

Justice Jobin Sebastian, issued the directions in a petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

Kerala High Court Dismisses Contempt Plea Over Denial Of Ordinary Leave To Periya Double Murder Case Convicts

Case Title: Geetha and Anr. v. S. Sreejith IPS and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 492

The Kerala High court has held that deferring to grant ordinary leave over fresh law and order threat to the prisoners is not willful violation of previous directions of the High Court quashing restrictions imposed on leave.

Justice G.Girish made the observation in a contempt petition filed by mothers of the convicts in the Periya Double Murder Case, involving murder of two Youth Congress activists in Periya in Kasargod District.

Departmental Exoneration No Ground For Discharge: Kerala High Court Permits Trial In 2013 Gold Smuggling Case Against Customs Official

Case Title: C. Madhavan v. CBI, Dr. S. Anil Kumar v. CBI and Ahmed Suhail v. CBI

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 493

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (September 8) upheld the order of the Additional Special Court (SPE/CBI) – II, Ernakulam dismissing the discharge plea filed by three of the accused in the 2013 gold smuggling case.

The case relates to the smuggling of around 56 kg of gold worth Rs. 17.86 crores through Cochin International Airport, causing a loss of Rs. 1.83 crores customs duties and cess to the government of India.

Justice A. Badharudeen dismissed the pleas preferred by accused C. Madhavan (A1), Dr. S. Anil Kumar (A8) and Ahmed Suhail (A11) and, observed that there are prima facie materials available against them from the prosecution records.

Surrogacy | Kerala High Court Rejects Couple's Plea To Use Frozen Embryos After Husband Crossed 55-Year Age Limit

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

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 494

The Kerala High Court, in a recent decision, has upheld the constitutional validity of the age limits imposed by the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021 on intending couples seeking surrogacy services.

The Division Bench of Justice K. Natarajan and Justice Johnson John dismissed an appeal filed by an intending couple challenging the Single Bench's dismissal of their plea challenging the age limits prescribed by the Act:

“we find that the age restriction in the Surrogacy Act is based on a reasonable relationship with the required aim sought to be achieved by the law and therefore, we find that the contentions of the learned counsel for the appellants in this regard are not legally sustainable.”

Kerala High Court Denies Bail To 3 PFI Members In Sreenivasan Murder Case, Says Custody Not Substantial Compared To Possible Life Sentence

Case Titles: Abdul Kader and Anr. v. Union of India and Anr. & Ashraf @ Asharaf Moulavi v. Union of India and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 495

The Kerala High Court recently denied bail to Popular Front of India (PFI) leader Ashraf Moulavi (A2), and members Abdul Kader (A19) and Firoz (A20), who are accused in the murder of RSS leader S.K. Sreenivasan in Palakkad on April 16, 2022. 

The Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishna S. dismissed the appeals preferred challenging the Special NIA court's refusal to grant them regular bail.

The Court was of the view that the grounds of prolonged incarceration and delay in trial are not sufficient to grant bail since they have not served substantial part of the sentence likely to imposed in the offences alleged for which there are prima facie materials.

Kerala High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail To 17 SFI Activists Booked For Assaulting University VC Ciza Thomas

Case Title: Archana P.S. and Ors. v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLive (Ker) 496

The Kerala High Court on Friday (September 11) granted anticipatory bail to 17 SFI activists and students of Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, Kalady for allegedly restraining and assaulting their Vice-Chancellor Dr. Ciza Thomas during a campus protest.

Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath passed the order granting bail to the students, who are arrayed as the accused in the crime registered by the Kalady Police.

Single Grave Act Can Constitute 'Cruelty' Under S. 498A IPC, Series Of Acts Not Necessary: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Firoz Kunnumal and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 497

The Kerala High Court recently held that a single grave act of cruelty can constitute the offence under Section 498A IPC and that a series of acts are not necessary.

Justice Jobin Sebastian observed:

“not every instance of harassment, disagreement, or ill-treatment between spouses would, by itself, constitute “cruelty” within the meaning of Section 498A of the IPC…At the same time, it cannot be said that a series of acts is invariably necessary to constitute cruelty. A single act, if sufficiently grave and of the nature contemplated by the statutory definition, may also constitute cruelty…”

General Allegations Of Domestic Harassment Must Have Direct Nexus With Suicide To Prosecute For Abetment: Kerala High Court

Case Title:  Sabeena v. State of Kerala and Anr.

Citation:  2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 498

The Kerala High Court has held that a prosecution for abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be sustained against a relative merely on the basis of general allegations of domestic discord, harassment or insulting words, unless the materials disclose the requisite mens rea and a direct or proximate nexus between the accused's conduct and the suicide.

Justice Jobin Sebastian made the observation while allowing a criminal miscellaneous case in part.

Daughter-In-Law Not Liable When Senior Citizen's Own Children Alive: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Hajara v. The Maintenance Tribunal and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 499

The Kerala High Court recently held that a daughter-in-law is not liable under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 when the senior citizen's children are alive.

Justice Harisankar V. Menon observed that a daughter-in-law would not fall within the definition of 'child' nor 'relative' under the Act when the senior citizen has other children:

“A reading of Section 9 of the Act would show that it is only the “children or relatives who can be directed to make payment of monthly maintenance to the senior citizen”…I am of the opinion that a daughter-in-law has not been roped into the provisions of the statute. True, Section 2(g) of the Act defines the term “relative” as a legal heir of a childless senior citizen. However, since admittedly the 2nd respondent has other children, including the petitioner's deceased husband, even the provisions of Section 2(g) cannot be applied.”

High Rich Ponzi Case: Kerala High Court Directs Special Court To Reconsider Prime Accused's Bail After ED Challenge

Case Title: Directorate of Enforcement v. Kolatt Dasan Prathapan

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 500

The Kerala High Court in a recent order, directed the Special Court for PMLA cases, Ernakulam to consider afresh the bail application of K.D. Prathapan, the prime accused in the High Rich Pozhi Scheme case, while considering a plea preferred by the Directorate of Enforcement to cancel the bail granted.

Justice C.S. Dias directed the Special Court to reconsider Prathapan's bail application within 60 days after hearing both sides. It was made clear that Prathapan would continue to be on bail until a fresh decision is made by the Special Court.

No Need For Formal Extradition Request To Seek Immediate Arrest Of Fugitive On Interpol Warrant: Kerala High Court

Case Title : Rakhul Krishnan v Union of India and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 501

The Kerala High Court has clarified that an International Arrest Warrant issued by a foreign treaty State and transmitted to India through Interpol cannot simply be ignored by the Indian nodal agency merely because the foreign State has not yet made a formal request for extradition through diplomatic channels.

A Division Bench comprising Dr. A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Preetha A.K held that, upon receipt of an International warrant, the Indian nodal agency must forward it to the Central Government and simultaneously bring it to the notice of the jurisdictional Magistrate, enabling action under Sections 34-B and 9 of the Extradition Act, 1962, respectively.

Legal Heirship Certificates Can't Be Restricted By Property Value, ₹5 Lakh Cap Has No Rationale: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Baby Kurian v The District Collector and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 502

The Kerala High Court has held that the Tahsildars are entitled to issue legal heirship certificates irrespective of the value of the property or assets involved.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas held that the financial ceiling contained in paragraph 236 of the Kerala Village Manual cannot, by itself, operate as a legal restriction on the issuance of a legal heirship certificate.

Address Not Needed For Suits Against Unknown Persons: Kerala High Court Directs Numbering Of Plea Over Anonymous 'Kattalan' Film Reviews

Case Title: M/s Cubes Entertainments v. Big Tree Entertainment Private Limited and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 503

The Kerala High Court has directed the Principal Munsiff Court, Ernakulam to number a suit preferred by production company M/s Cubes Entertainments seeking removal of the reviews of the Malayalam movie 'Kattalan' from BookMyShow platform.

Justice Easwaran S. set aside the munsiff court's order rejecting the plaintiff's application seeking exemption from complying with Order VI and Rule 14A CPC, which mandates petitioners to provide the address of the parties for service of notice.

Bail Applications Without Details Of Criminal Antecedents, Prior Pleas Not To Be Numbered: Kerala High Court

Case Titles: Pramasivam v. State of Kerala & Siraj Vazhayil @ Saji Thaneerkattil v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 504

The Kerala High Court has directed that bail applications not disclosing criminal antecedents and details of prior bail pleas as mandated by the Apex Court in Zeba Khan v. State of U.P. and Others, cannot be numbered.

Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath observed that bail applications rarely comply with the afore directions and the administrative mandate contained in the Office Memorandum dated 13.02.2026 issued by the High Court.

Karuvatta Murder Case: Kerala High Court Upholds JJB Order Allowing Escorted Movement Of Minors For Evidence Collection

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

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 505

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (September 15) upheld the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, Alappuzha that allowed the escorted movement of the children in conflict with law (CCLs) for evidence collection in the Karuvatta murder case.

The case refers to the murder of a 67-year-old man on August 17, 2026 allegedly by his 13-year-old granddaughter and three other minors. The minors are presently housed at the Government Observation Home, Alappuzha.

Justice G. Girish observed the conditions imposed by the JJB were sufficient to protect the minors from public scrutiny.

Courts Releasing Illegally Arrested Accused Must Permit Same Day Re-Arrest After Compliance With Formalities: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Jose M.P. v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 506

The Kerala High Court recently directed that courts, releasing an illegally arrested accused, must permit police to re-arrest accused on the same day after compliance with procedural formalities.

Justice A. Badharudeen held:

“all Criminal Courts shall ensure that while setting an accused at his liberty, finding his arrest as illegal, the Courts shall pass an order on the date of release of the accused itself to the effect that the release of the accused for non-compliance of the formalities of arrest will not stand in the way of arresting the accused by the Investigating Officer, again, on completing the formalities of arrest and the courts must grant permission to the Investigating Officer to arrest the released accused again, on the same day, as per law.”

Donor's Criminal Antecedents Can't Be Ground To Reject Organ Donation: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Muhammed Jishar v. Lakeshore Hospital

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 507

The Kerala High Court has held that the criminal antecedents of a proposed organ donor cannot be considered as a reason to withhold papers relating to organ donation under the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994.

Justice Harisankar V. Menon made the observation in a writ petition filed by a person suffering from chronic kidney disease and requiring organ transplantation.

Kerala High Court Permits Widow To Use Preserved Embryos For Assisted Reproduction After Husband's Death

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

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 508

The Kerala High Court recently permitted a woman to use embryos preserved for assisted reproduction after her husband died.

Justice Harisankar V. Menon referred to Section 22 of the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021, which provides that an ART clinic can perform any treatment or procedure only with the written informed consent of parties.

Kerala High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail To Lawyer Accused Of Sexually Harassing Lady Advocate, Notes Prior Counter Case

Case Title: X v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 509

The Kerala High Court recently granted anticipatory bail to a lawyer, who is accused of sexually harassing a lady advocate outside a Palakkad court.

Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath noted that a prior crime was registered against the complainant at the instance of the petitioner lawyer and went on to grant him bail.

Kerala High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail To Woman Accused Of Throwing Newborn Baby From Hospital Window, Says 'Intent' Not Shown

Case Title: A v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 510

The Kerala High Court recently granted pre-arrest bail to a 20-year-old woman booked for attempted murder of newborn, who she threw out of the window after giving birth in the hospital bathroom.

Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath noted that there were no materials suggesting that the woman intended to cause the death of the child and that she did not have any criminal antecedents.

Professor At Statutory University Does Not Hold 'Public Office', Can't Be Subject To Quo Warranto: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Dr. V. Madhu v. The Chancellor of CUSAT and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 511

Kerala High Court recently dismissed a public interest litigation seeking a writ of quo warranto to quash the appointment of a professor of Mathematics department in the Cochin University of Science and Technology (CUSAT).

The Division Bench of Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. dismissed the PIL.

Delay In Domestic Violence Complaint Alone No Ground To Quash Proceedings: Kerala High Court

Case Title: M and Anr. v. A

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 512

The Kerala High Court has held that mere delay in approaching a Magistrate under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDV Act) cannot, by itself, be a ground to quash proceedings, particularly where the allegations include acts of domestic violence occurring at a later point of time.

Justice Jobin Sebastian was delivering the judgment in a petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), seeking quashing of proceedings pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Thrissur.

Trial Court Cannot Set Aside Advocate Commissioner's Report After It Is Received In Evidence: Kerala High Court

Case Title: S. Abdul Razzak v. C.B. Suraja Devi and Anr

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 513

The Kerala High Court has held that once an Advocate Commissioner's report and the evidence relating to it have been received in evidence, a trial court cannot subsequently set aside or strike off the report under Order XXVI Rule 10(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).

Justice Easwaran S. delivered the judgment in a petition challenging orders of the II Additional Munsiff's Court, Ernakulam, which had set aside an Advocate Commissioner's report and plan in a long-pending suit concerning title and injunction.

Lawyer Cannot Swear Affidavit On Behalf Of Client Unless Facts Are Within Personal Knowledge: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Balan and Anr. v. Parameswaran and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 514

The Kerala High Court has held that a lawyer for the plaintiff cannot file an affidavit on behalf of the plaintiff seeking production of documents.

Justice Easwaran S. delivered the judgement in an original petition.

Kerala High Court Directs Expeditious Decision On Jiostar's Plea Against Order Halting Web Series 'Anali' Allegedly Based On Koodathayi Murders

Case Title: Jiostar India Pvt. Ltd. v. Jollyamma Joseph @ Jolly

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 515

The Kerala High Court on Friday (September 18) directed the Munsiff Court, Ernakulam to expeditiously hear and dispose of Jiostar Pvt. Ltd.'s plea to set aside an order halting the release of JioHotstar webseries 'Anali', which is allegedly based on the Koodathayi murders.

Justice Easwaran S. issued the directions.

Section 233 BNSS Applies Only When Cases Concern Same Offence, Not Merely Same Transaction: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Roji Augustine v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 516

The Kerala High Court has held that the statutory requirement under Section 233 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, requiring a complaint case to be stayed when a police investigation is pending, applies only when both proceedings concern the same offence.

Justice C.S Dias made the observation while dismissing a petition filed by Roji Augustine, in a cheating case pending before the Judicial first Class Magistrate Court, Chottanikkara.

Kerala High Court Closes Plea Against Ban On Police Participation In Temple Rituals After State Clarifies Restriction Applies Only In Uniform

Case Title: Dr. P.S. Mahendra Kumar v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 517

The Kerala High Court on Thursday (17 September) closed the plea against the police circular prohibiting police participation in temple ceremonies as the State Police Chief clarified that the circular did not prohibit the practice of any religion or interfere with the administration of temples or other religious institutions.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and Justice K. V. Jayakumar closed the writ petition after recording the statement on behalf of the State Police Chief.

Kerala High Court Quashes Order Dismissing Actor Jayasurya's Income Tax Appeal, Remands For Fresh Consideration

Case Title: Jayan Vatahakattu Moni v. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 518

The Kerala High Court has quashed an order dismissing actor Jayasurya's (Jayan Vathakkattu Moni) income tax appeal, holding that an income-tax appellate authority cannot dismiss an appeal solely because the assessee failed to appear for the hearing.

Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. observed that the appellate authority is bound to frame points of determination as per Section 250(6) and answer the same by providing reasons.

Kerala High Court Grants Bail To Reporter TV MD Anto Augustine Arrested In Alcohol Possession Case

Case Title: Anto Augustine v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 519

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (September 22) granted regular bail to Reporter TV Managing Director Anto Augustine, who is booked in an excise case for illegal possession of large quantities of alcohol in his residence in Wayanad.

Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath noted that recovery was effected in the case already and that Augustine was also handed over to police custody.

Kerala High Court Upholds Navy Rule Allowing Investigating Officer To Act As Prosecutor In Court-Martial

Case Title: Union of India and Ors. v. Santosh Karwade and Anr. and connected case

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 520

The Kerala High Court has held that an Investigating Officer can also be appointed as the Prosecutor in a court-martial proceeding under the Navy Act, 1957, observing that such an appointment does not, by itself, violate the right to a fair trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

A Division Bench comprising Justice K. Natarajan and Justice Johnson John delivered the judgment in appeals arising from a single bench judgment.

Delay In Re-Submitting Final Report After Curing Formal Defects Not Ground For Default Bail: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Sagesh v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 521

The Kerala High Court has held that default bail cannot be granted merely because there was delay in re-submitting the final report, which was submitted within the statutory period and returned only for curing formal defects.

Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath reasoned:

“Where a final report is returned only for curing formal defects, the permission granted is to rectify such defects. Once cured and re- presented without any further investigation, the re-submission relates back to the original date of filing. It is immaterial whether the defect is cured within the period granted by the Court. Accordingly, I hold that where the final report is filed within the statutory period under Section 187 of the BNSS, and returned only for formal defects, its re-submission after curing such defects must be treated as within time, even if effected after expiry of the statutory period.”

Inter-Religion Marriage Also Entitles Couple To Benefits Under Inter-Caste Marriage Reservation: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Jisha Thomas v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 522

The Kerala High Court has observed that an inter-religion marriage must also be taken into consideration for Inter-Caste Marriage reservation benefits.

Justice Harisankar V. Menon made the observation while considering a writ petition filed by a person who sought appointment to the post of farm employee under the 'Inter-Caste Marriage' reservation category.

Vadakara MDMA Case: Kerala High Court Grants Bail To Two Teachers Booked Under NDPS Act

Case Titles: Kavya K. v. State of Kerala and Anr. & Keerthana K.C. v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 523

The Kerala High Court granted bail to two teachers, Kavya K. and Keerthana K.C., who were arrested in the Vadakara MDMA case.

The case relates to the drug trafficking case, involving school teachers and special educators as financial intermediaries.

Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath granted bail to third accused Kavya, who was arrested on July 25. The judge had, earlier this month, granted bail to second accused Keerthana, who was arrested on July 11.

Muslim Divorcee Need Not Produce Court Decree To Delete Husband's Name From Passport: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Raeesa Parveen v. Union of India and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 524

The Kerala High Court has held that the Passport Authority cannot insist on divorce decree for deletion of husband's name from the passport of a Muslim woman, when the 'talaq' is recognised under the Muslim Personal Law. 

Justice Murali Purushothaman observed,

"Divorce resulting from a 'talak' pronounced by the husband is a mode of divorce recognised and accepted under Muslim personal law...divorcees applying for change of name or for deletion of spouse's name in existing passport are not required to produce court's order for judicial separation / decree of divorce."

Kerala High Court Directs Bar Council To Continuously Review, Publish List Of Advocates Practicing Without Clearing AIBE, Valid CoP

Case Title: Amarnath Joshi Surendiran v. Secretary, Bar Council of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 525

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (September 23) directed the Bar Council of Kerala (BCK) to continuously update the list of advocates, who have not cleared All India Bar Examination (AIBE) or obtained Certificate of Practice (CoP).

The Division Bench of Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. was considering a public interest litigation that pointed out the inaction on the part of the State Bar Council in not following the rules and the provisions of the Advocates Act, thereby permitting advocates to practice without a Certificate of Practice.

Sabarimala Gold Theft Probe: Kerala High Court Says Apprehension Of Vigilance Team Replacement Is 'Misconceived'

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

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 526

The Kerala High Court on Thursday (September 24) closed the plea moved by BJP leader K. Surendran seeking a direction not to replace the existing members of the Devaswom Vigilance Investigation Team functioning at Sabarimala, while the probe into the gold theft cases are pending.

The plea that came up before the Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar was moved after seeing a news article dated September 14 on Mathrubhumi daily reporting that the State Police Chief is intending to replace the Vigilance Team members despite specific directions of the High Court.

Teacher Beating Female Student's Palm In Classroom Full Of Students Won't Attract Offence Of Outraging Modesty: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Raja Varier v. State of Kerala and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 527

The Kerala High Court recently quashed the criminal proceedings against a male teacher, who was booked for the offence of outraging the modesty of his female student by allegedly beating her palm in a classroom.

Justice Jobin Sebastian observed that the teacher did not have requisite intent to outrage the de facto complainant's modesty as he beat her only to wake her in a class full of students.

Centre Can Invoke S.100 Patents Act To Make Exorbitantly Priced Patented Drugs And Sell On Non-Commercial Basis: Kerala High Court

Case Title: In Re Exorbitant Pricing of Life Saving Patented Medicines

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 528

The Kerala High Court on Monday (September 28) held that Section 100 of the Patents Act can be invoked by the Central government to use a patent to manufacture the medicine covered by it and sell it to a person, including a needy patient, on a non-commercial basis.

The court ruled the provision may be invoked where government intervention is required, including when a patented medicine is being sold at an exorbitant price.

Justice Harisankar V. Menon delivered the verdict in a suo motu plea on exorbitant pricing of patented life-saving drugs.

Plea Before Kerala High Court Challenging Centre's TV Rating Policy Clause On Landing Page Viewership Withdrawn

Case Title: All India Digital Cable Federation and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 529

The Kerala High Court on Monday (September 28) permitted the petitioners to withdraw a plea challenging the proviso to Clause 5.4.1 of the TV Ratings Policy 2026 issued by the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting (MIB). 

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas noted that a memo for withdrawing the plea has been filed by the petitioners, All India Digital Cable Federation (AIDCF) and DEN Network Ltd. The Court then dismissed the plea as withdrawn and granted liberty to file a fresh plea.
Domestic Violence | In-Laws Can't Be Roped In Without Material Showing Shared Household With Complainant: Kerala High Court

Case Title: A and Anr. v. S

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 530

The Kerala High Court has held that the existence of a domestic relationship is a foundational requirement for bringing a person within the ambit of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDV Act). 

Justice Jobin Sebastian was considering a petition seeking to quash proceedings initiated under the PWDV Act.

Accidental 'Saffron Down' Display Of National Flag Not Offence Without Intent To Insult: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Mohammed Kasim H.K v. Union Territory of Lakshadweep and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 531

The Kerala High Court has held that accidental 'saffron down' display of National Flag does not attract prosecution under Section 2 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971 as the required intention or mens rea is absent. 

Justice A. Badharudeen was delivering the judgment in a petition to quash the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner for offence punishable under Section 2 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act.

Sabarimala Melsanthi Selection: Kerala High Court Appoints Former Judge VG Arun As Observer, Seeks Video Recording Of Proceedings

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

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 532

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (September 29) appointed former high court judge Justice V.G. Arun as an 'observer' to oversee the selection process for the Melsanthies of the Sabarimala Sree Dharma Sastha Temple and Malikappuram Temple for the year 1202 ME (2026-27).

A Division Bench comprising Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar passed the order in a suo motu proceeding arising from the Sabarimala Special Commissioner's report concerning the selection process.

Kerala High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To YouTuber Thoppi, Says No Obscene Or Sexually Coloured Remarks Directly Made By Him

Case Title: Muhammed Nihad @ Thoppi v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 533

The Kerala High Court on Monday (September 28) granted anticipatory bail to controversial Malayalam gamer/Youtuber Toppi, officially known as Muhammed Nihad, who is booked for allegedly live-streaming obscene remarks about a young woman on streaming platforms.

Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath observed that there were no obscene words or sexually coloured remarks spoken about the complainant and allowed the bail plea:

"I have viewed the video in question. In the said video, there is nothing to show that any obscene words or sexually coloured remarks were directly spoken by the applicant against the victim. Considering the allegations made against the applicant, his custodial interrogation seems unnecessary. For these reasons, I find this to be an appropriate case to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicant."

Shuhaib Murder Case: Kerala High Court Refuses To Transfer Trial, Directs Court To Ensure Accused Get Full Opportunity To Cross-Examine Witnesses

Case Title: Akash M.V and Ors. v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 534

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (September 29) dismissed the transfer petition filed by the accused persons in the Shuhaib murder case seeking to transfer the trial from Additional Sessions Judge-III, Thalassery to another competent court.

Justice C.S. Dias observed in open court:

"Learned Sessions Judge shall ensure that both parties are afforded full and effective opportunity to participate in the trial including by suo motu reopening the evidence and permitting the counsel for the accused to cross-examine the witnesses. The counsel for the accused persons are expected to cooperate with the court and avoid unnecessary interruptions or adjournments. Considering that the case is of the year 2018 and given the number of witnesses cited, trial shall be conducted with due expedition. Learned Sessions Court is directed to dispose of the case untrammeled by any observations in this order. The above transfer petition is dismissed."

Pakistani National Married To Indian Citizen Has No Vested Right To Seek Visa: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Unaiz Kadumbottil and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 535

The Kerala High Court recently held that a foreign national does not have a right for consideration of her visa application to India merely because she is married to an Indian citizen.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas dismissed the writ petition filed by a married couple, one of whom was a Pakistani national, who wanted to enter India to attend her brother-in-law's wedding.

Kerala High Court Quashes Govt Order Abolishing Police Officers' Association, Says It Violates Article 19(1)(c) Rights

Case Title: Kerala Police Association v. The State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 536

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (29 September) allowed a petition challenging the government order that restructures police personnel associations.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas quashed the impugned orders.

"It is evident that the impugned order is an intrusion to the rights of the petitioner in both these writ petitioners granted under Article 19 (1) (c) and Article 33 of the Constitution of India.. The impugned order abolishing the Kerala Police Officers Association (KPOA) and interfering with the membership and.. without the consultation of its members are contrary by laws and are legally invalid. Consequently, the orders, constituting the ad-hoc committee are to be quashed…" the Court ordered.

Kerala High Court Allows Couple To Continue IVF Treatment After Crossing ART Act Age Limit Upon Undertaking To Bear All Risks

Case Title : X and Anr. v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 537

The Kerala High Court, in a recent decision, permitted a married couple to continue IVF treatment even though one of them had crossed the statutory age limit prescribed by Section 21(g) of the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021.

Justice Harisankar V. Menon took note of Punjab and Haryana High Court decision relied on by the couple wherein in a similar situation, the couple over the age limit was permitted to continue treatment upon undertaking to bear all the risks.

'National Waste': Kerala High Court Says PG Doctors Can't Be Left Idle Without Posting; 1-Year Bond Runs From Result Date

Case Titles: George Balu and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Baddevolu Priyanka and Ors. v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 538

The Kerala High Court recently held that the mandatory period of senior residency for medical professionals, who did their post-graduation from Government Medical Colleges, starts immediately upon completion of course and not the actual posting date.

Justice Viju Abraham observed:

“the obligation of a post-graduate students like the petitioners herein as per the Board condition is only from the date of publication of result for a period of one year. The period of Senior Residency as a bonded obligation has to start from the date of publication of the result irrespective of whether a posting could be granted soon after the publication of the result or thereafter. It is ordered accordingly.”