Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: August 28 - September 03, 2023

Nominal Index [Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 433-446] Greik Xavier V Sub Inspector Of Police 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 433Vinayakumar K.R. v. State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 434Lalitha V Krishna Pillai 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 435Dr Raju Antony V Kerala State Council For Science, Technology And Environment And Connected Cases 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 436Biju Mathew & Anr. v. Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kodungalloor & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 437Chandi Samuval V Saimon Samuval 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 438Karthik S Nair V State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 439Zulu Haris v. Union of India & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 440XXX v. State of Kerala & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 441Lalamma John V Jijo Varghese 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 442Anu v. State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 443Swaroop V State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 444 Arvind Singh Rajpoot v. M/S Intersight Holidays Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 445Maheen Ali V State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 446Judgments/Orders This Week Consider If Further Conditions Warranted For Permitting Use Of Forest Land For Non-Forest Purposes Like Film Shoot: Kerala HC To GovtCase title: Angels Nair V The Principal SecretaryCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 432The Kerala High Court directed the State government to consider if further conditions have to be issued while granting permission to use forest land for non-forest purposes like shooting movies, so as to ensure that no damage is caused to the forest and wildlife.Justice Viju Abraham, held thus,“The respondents are also directed to consider whether any further additional conditions need be imposed in the matter while granting permission to use the forest for non-forest activities like the one done in the present case, so that no damage is caused to the forest and wild life. With the above said direction WP(C) No.7107 of 2020 is disposed of.”Speedy Trials Spirit Of Article 21: Kerala High Court Quashes 12 Yrs Old Cruelty Case Against HusbandCase Title: Greik Xavier V Sub Inspector Of PoliceCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 433The Kerala High Court quashed a 12 years old cruelty case against husband, observing that the parties have settled their disputes and the victim does not want to prosecute the matter further.Justice K Babu added that no useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing criminal prosecution based on a FIR, the investigation of which commenced twelve years back but reached nowhere.“Speedy investigations and trial are mandated by the letter and spirit of the provisions of the Code and the constitutional protection enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution,” the bench observed.S.451 CrPC | Seized Property Ought Not To Remain In Police/ Court Custody For Longer Than Absolutely Necessary: Kerala High CourtCase Title: Vinayakumar K.R. v. State of KeralaCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 434The Kerala High Court analysed the scope of Section 451 CrPC which empowers the criminal courts to make orders for interim custody of seized property produced before it during trial and inquiry of an offence.The Single Judge Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. was of the considered view that when a property is so produced before the criminal court, the said court would have the discretion to make such an order as it thinks fit for the proper custody of such article, pending the conclusion of the enquiry or trial. However, it cuationed,"Where the property, which has been the subject matter of an offence, is seized by the police, it ought not to be retained in the custody of the Court or of the police for any time longer than what is absolutely necessary. As the seizure of the property by the police amounts to a clear entrustment of the property to a Government servant, the idea is that the property should be restored to the original owner after the necessity to retain it ceases."CrPC | Revisional Court Can't Act As Appellate Court, Shouldn't Interfere Unless Decision Grossly Flawed: Kerala High CourtCase title: Lalitha V Krishna PillaiCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 435The Kerala High Court has held that the power of a revisional court under Section 397 to 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 ("CrPC") cannot be equated to that of an Appellate Court.The Bench comprising Justice K Babu thereby upheld the order of dismissal passed by a Magistrate.“Unless the finding of the court, whose decision is sought to be revised, is shown to be perverse or untenable in law or is grossly erroneous or glaringly unreasonable or where the decision is based on no material or where the material facts are wholly ignored or where the judicial discretion is exercised arbitrarily or capriciously, the courts may not interfere with decision in exercise of their revisional jurisdiction.”Appellate Body Must Reconsider Cases Of Disciplinary Proceedings With No Evidence, Not Merely Reiterate Previous Orders: Kerala High CourtCase Title: Dr Raju Antony V Kerala State Council For Science, Technology And Environment And Connected CasesCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 436The Kerala High Court...

Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: August 28 - September 03, 2023

Navya Benny

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Navya Benny

Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: August 28 - September 03, 2023

Navya Benny

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Navya Benny

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers