Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 03 - June 09, 2024

Nominal Index [Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 327-341]Geetha v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 327M/S. Krishna Holiday Village v The Deputy Commissioner, 2024 LiveLaw Ker 328Prabhakaran P. V State Of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw Ker 329Suo Moto v Yeshwanth Shenoy, 2024 LiveLaw Ker 330Jewel Roshan T v Union of India,2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 331Vignesh Kumar Balasundar v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw Ker 332Chandanapurath Rajeevan and Another v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 333Sunil N S v State of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 334Sijo Thomas v State of Kerala and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 335M/S.I.T.I.LTD Versus State Of Kerala, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 336Chairman, PSM College of Dental Sciences & Research v Reshma Vinod and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 337Shafeek v State of Kerala & Connected Cases, 2024 LiveLaw Ker 338A J Stephen v Rosemariya, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 339S. Kamaladharan v Kerala Shipping and Inland Corporation Ltd. And Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 340M/S M.Trade Links Versus Union Of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 341Judgment/Orders This Week[KAAPA Act] Preventive Detention Involves Curtailment Of Precious Constitutional Guarantees, High Degree Of Diligence Expected From Authorities: Kerala High CourtCase Title: Geetha v State of KeralaCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 327The Kerala High Court held that authorities are expected to act diligently in matters relating to preventive detention since that involves curtailment of the fundamental rights of citizens.In the present case, the representation was submitted by the detenu to the government on February 15, 2024, against the detention order. It was considered only on April 08, 2024, after receipt of the report from the Advisory Board on March 19, 2024.The Division Bench comprising Justice A.Muhamed Mustaque and Justice S Manu held that lethargy, lapses, negligence, delay and callousness on the part of the authorities in considering representations in preventive detention cases violates Article 22 (5) of the Constitution of India.Writ Court Has Power To Grant Installments For Payment Of Tax Dues Extending Beyond Installments Provided Under Statute: Kerala High CourtCase Title: M/S. Krishna Holiday Village v The Deputy CommissionerCitation: 2024 LiveLaw Ker 328The Kerala High Court has held that the Writ Court has the power to grant instalments, extending beyond the instalments granted by the assessing authority for clearing tax dues under Rule 30 B of the Kerala General Sales Tax (KGST), 1963.As per Rule 30B of the KGST Rules, the assessing authority can permit payment of tax in not more than six monthly instalments based on the request of the dealer.Justice Murali Purushothaman observed that the writ court invoking its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution has the power to grant instalment facilities extending beyond instalments granted by the assessing authority under Rule 30B of the KGST Rules.Misconception That Anticipatory Bail Could Be Granted If Custodial Interrogation Was Not Required: Kerala High CourtCase Title: Prabhakaran P. V State Of KeralaCitation: 2024 LiveLaw Ker 329The Kerala High Court held that it is a common misconception that anticipatory bail could be granted if custodial interrogation was not required. The Court stated that custodial interrogation was just one factor to consider when deciding on an anticipatory bail application.Justice A. Badharudeen stated that the Court has to consider if a prima facie case was made out against the accused, the nature of the offence and the severity of punishment while considering anticipatory bail applications.Judge Not Initiating Summary Contempt Proceedings Doesn't Bar Court From Initiating Suo Moto Proceedings: Kerala High CourtCase Title: Suo Moto v Yeshwanth ShenoyCitation: 2024 LiveLaw Ker 330The Kerala High Court has held that if a Judge didn't initiate contempt proceedings in accordance with the procedure as laid down under Section 14 of the Contempt of Courts Act, it does not bar the High Court from initiating suo moto contempt proceedings under Section 15 of the Act.The Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice G. Girish made this observation while deciding the challenge made by Advocate Yeshwanth Shenoy against the contempt proceedings initiated against him.[KEAM 2024] Scribe Can Be Someone Who Has Completed Matriculation But Not Completed 12th Standard: Kerala High CourtCase Title: Jewel Roshan T v Union of IndiaCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 331The Kerala High Court has permitted a candidate who has 90 per cent permanent physical disability to attend the Kerala Engineering Architectural Medical Examination (KEAM), 2024 with the help of a scribe who has completed matriculation and had not completed 12th standard.The KEAM, 2024 exam will begin today.Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. ordered thus:“Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.3 to permit the petitioner to attend the examination through the help of a scribe who has the qualification referred to...

Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 03 - June 09, 2024

Tellmy Jolly

Tags