Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 16 – 22, 2025

Nominal Index [Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 338 - 353]Revathy C. v. State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 338Headstar Global Pvt. Ltd. v. State Of Kerala & Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 339Aneesh Babu v. Assistant Director, ED, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 340The Secretary Cum Manager, Majilis Arts and Science College v. National Council for Teacher Education & Anr., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 341The Principal v. Union of India & Ors, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 342R. Ramesh v. Vijaya Bank & Ors. and connected cases, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 343Hussain & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 344Suresh v. Sree Narayana Smaraka Samathi Trust, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 345HDFC Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Zeenath and Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 346M.I. Mohammed v. M/s. HLL Life Care Ltd. & Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 347Abdul Rahim v. Suku S & Anr., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 348Raju Kattakayam v. State of Kerala & Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 349Dr. C. M. Aboobacker v State of Kerala and Another, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 350Moideen Koya & Ors. v. M/S.Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Co. Pvt. Ltd. & Anr., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 351Manju Saud & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 352Harisankar S. v. State of Kerala & Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 353Judgments/ Orders This WeekKerala Paddy Land Act | Magistrate Can't Order Interim Custody Of Seized Vehicles Which Are Handed Over To Collector: High CourtCase Title: Revathy C. v. State of KeralaCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 338The Kerala High Court has held that a Magistrate Court is not empowered to rule on interim custody of vehicles seized under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act 2019, if the vehicles were handed over to District Collector.Justice V.G. Arun conceded that through prior decisions it has been settled that the jurisdictional Magistrate has the power to order interim custody.Police Cannot Attach Bank Account Under S.107 BNSS Without Magistrate's Approval : Kerala High CourtCase Title: Headstar Global Pvt. Ltd. v. State Of Kerala & Ors.Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 339The Kerala High Court held that a bank account can be attached under Section 107 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, only on the orders of the jurisdictional Magistrate and that police cannot uniterally do so.Section 107 BNSS is a new provision which provides for the attachment of "proceeds of crime."Justice V.G. Arun was considering a petition filed by Headstar Global Pvt. Ltd., whose account was frozen by Kalamassery Police after funds linked to a cheating case involving Spezia Organic Condiments Pvt. Ltd. were allegedly transferred into its account.Kerala High Court Closes Bail Plea Of Businessman Who Accused ED Officer Of Bribery, Agency Says No Intention To Arrest HimCase Title: Aneesh Babu v. Assistant Director, EDCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 340The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (June 17) closed the bail application of Aneesh Babu who leveled bribery allegations against the Assistant Director of the Enforcement Directorate (ED), Ernakulam Office.The petitioner had been summoned to appear before the Assistant Director, ED Special Investigating Team at New Delhi in connection with Crime No. KCZO/14/2025. As per the notice, he was asked to bring all the documents relating to the Vigilance Case. It is further mentioned in the notice that failure to appear and give evidence will lead to proceedings under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and other provisions of BNS, 2023.NCTE Cannot Penalise Colleges For Its Own Delay In Granting Recognition: Kerala High CourtCase Title: The Secretary Cum Manager, Majilis Arts and Science College v. National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 341The Kerala High Court has ruled that colleges cannot be penalised for procedural delays caused by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) in processing applications for recognition under the Integrated Teacher Education Programme (ITEP).Justice D.K. Singh observed that as per the binding timeline laid down by the Supreme Court in Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya v. State of U.P. (2013) 2 SCC 617, NCTE was required to communicate deficiencies within 45 days and issue recognition by 03 March of the academic year concerned. However, the show cause notice was issued after five months, with no proper explanation offered for the delay. Writ Petitioner Cannot File Writ Appeal Against Interim Order Granted To Him: Kerala High CourtCase Title: The Principal v. Union of India & Ors.Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 342The Kerala High Court has observed that a writ appeal is not maintainable under Section 5(i) of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958, when the Court has already granted the interim relief sought by the petitioner. In such a situation, the petitioner cannot claim to be an aggrieved party to file an appeal.The Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice P.V. Balakrishnan was considering a writ appeal filed by the Principal of Century International Institute of...

Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 16 – 22, 2025

K. Salma Jennath

Tags