Nominal Index

Dinesh Menon v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 539

Raslin v Kurudankandi Shameer and connected cases, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 540

S.J.R. Kumar v The Travancore Devaswom Board and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 541

S v A and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 542

Praveen Sodharan and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 543

X and Anr. v. Kochi Municipal Corporation, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 544

S. Aswakumar v. Kochouseph Chittilappilly, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 545

Hiran Das Murali v. Regional Passport Officer and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 546

Ameya Sandeep (Minor) v State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 547

K v. I, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 548

K.P. Babu v. Land Revenue Commissioner and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 549

X v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 550

N.A. Thoufeeque v. The State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 551

Jalaja M. v. The District Police Chief and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 552

A v. D, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 553

Aswathi G.R. v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 554

Balan P.K. v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 555

Udayan v. X and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 556

X and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 557

Anilkumar v. Anitha Kumari and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 558

Mohammed J.I. and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 559

Sindhu S. Nair. v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 560

Goshree Islands Development Authority (GIDA) and Anr. v. Tritvam Apartment Owners Association (TAOA) and Ors. and M/s C. Jacob & Company v. Tritvam Apartment, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 561

The Kerala State Waqf Board v M.K. Venu and Ors. and connected case, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 562

Prasad Mahendragiri v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 563

P. Imbichi Koya v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 564

X v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 565

Prof. Monamma Kokkad v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 566

Adv. K.M. Shajahan v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 567

K.C. Unni and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 568

Rajendran v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 569

C.R. Neelakandan v. Union of India and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 570

Suo Motu Civil Reference v. Union of India and Ors. & connected cases, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 571

X v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 572

James V. Kurian and Ors. v V.K. Sam and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 573

K.A. Muhammed Ashraf and Anr. v. Muslim Girls' Higher Secondary School and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 574

Jiostar India Pvt. Ltd. v. Jollyamma Joseph @ Jolly and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 575

Najeeb and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 576

Jolly John v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 577

Najeeb v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 578

The State Of Kerala Represented By Deputy Superintendent Of Police v. Govt. of India and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 579

Pinarayi Vijayan v. Adv. K.M. Shajahan and Ors., and connected cases, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 580

S v J, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 581

Roddam Pandurangaiah Naga Govardhan v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 582

District Court Bar Association and Anr. v State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 583

Prasanth K. v the District Collector and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 584

X v. The District Police Chief and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 585

Adv. K.M. Shajahan v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 586

Ayishath Ruksana v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 587

Biju v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 588

X v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 589

Ravi E. and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 590

Remadevi T.L. v. Reserve Bank of India and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 591

Mohammed Shameer Ali v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 592

Yeshwant Shenoy v. Bar Council of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 593

The State of Kerala and ors. v. Sebastian @ Sabu V.K., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 594

Shaji v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 595

Bureau of Indian Standards v. M/s. Mars Veneers and Boards and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 596

I. Bindhu v. M/s Thiruvananthapuram Service Co-operative and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 597

SadiqaIi M v. Federal Bank and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 598

Adv. P.S. Subeesh v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 599

X v. The Registrar (District Judiciary) and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 600

Nivin Pauly v. State of Kerala and Ors., Abrid Shine v. State of Kerala and Anr., P.S. Shamnas v. State of Kerala and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 601

M.R. Ajayan v The Director, CBI and Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 602

Chokkad Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v Labour Court and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 603

Radhika Menon v. Branch Manager and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 604

X v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 605

Sophy v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 606

X v. State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 607

State of Kerala and Ors. v Samatha M M and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 608

Rajan Babu v. State of Kerala, 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 609

Nirmala Johny and Ors. v State of Kerala and Ors., 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 610

Judgments/ Orders This Month

Kerala High Court Asks Assembly Speaker To Take Steps To Decide On MLA Mani C Kappan's Disqualification

Case Title: Dinesh Menon v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 539

The Kerala High Court on Thursday (October 1) directed the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Kerala to take appropriate steps in accordance with law on the question of disqualification of Pala MLA Mani C. Kappan following his conviction in 4 cheque cases.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas today heard detailed arguments by Advocate V. Sethunath for the petitioner, the Advocate General K. Jaju Babu and Senior Advocate Santosh Mathew for Kappan.

Kerala High Court Declares Wife Exclusive Owner Of Property Bought In Joint Name With Husband Using Her Father's Money

Case Title : Raslin v Kurudankandi Shameer and connected cases

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 540

The Kerala High Court has recently declared a woman exclusive owner of a property bought in joint names with her husband, using her father's money.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Sathish Ninan and Justice P. Krishna Kumar delivered the judgment while partly allowing an appeal filed by the woman seeking rights over a residential property purchased in her and her husband's joint names.

Kerala High Court Directs Sabarimala Devaswom Board To Ensure Prasadam Materials Conform To Temple Customs

Case Title : S.J.R. Kumar v The Travancore Devaswom Board and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 541

The Kerala High Court has recently directed the Travancore Devaswom Board (TDB) to exercise due care while procuring materials for the preparation of Nivedyam and Prasadam at Sabarimala and to ensure that the materials are in conformity with the prescribed quality standards as well as religious customs and requirement applicable to the Temple.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and Justice K.V. Jayakumar made the observation while disposing of a writ petition by a devotee of Lord Ayyappa, who had challenged the procurement of Halal-certified jaggery for preparing offerings, including Aravana and Unniyappam.

DNA Test Of Child Can't Be Ordered Routinely Without Prima Facie Proof Of Non-Access Between Spouses: Kerala High Court

Case Title : S v A and Ors.

Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 542

The Kerala High Court has held that a DNA test cannot be ordered as a matter of course merely on the basis of an allegation disputing the paternity of a child born during the subsistence of a valid marriage.

Justice Jobin Sebastian made the observation while dismissing a criminal miscellaneous case challenging the refusal of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Wadakkanchery, to direct DNA examination of a minor child in proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

Case Against Brothel Operators, Customers Can't Be Quashed Merely Because Women Allegedly Exploited Have No Grievance: Kerala High Court

Case Title : Praveen Sodharan and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 543

The Kerala High Court recently refused to quash criminal proceedings against persons, who had allegedly run a brothel and rendered assistance for its running, even though the women allegedly subjected to the sexual exploitation stated that they had no grievance.

Justice Jobin Sebastian observed that the offences under the special enactment of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 cannot be quashed.

Kerala High Court Asks Legislature To Reconsider DNA Test Requirement For Correcting Father's Name In Birth Records Where Paternity Is Undisputed

Case Title : X and Anr. v. Kochi Municipal Corporation

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 544

The Kerala High Court has asked the legislature to re-consider the statutory mandates under the Registration of Births and Deaths Act (1969) and the Rules (1999) requiring DNA test reports, notarized agreements, court order, etc. while applying for correction in father's name in birth records in cases where paternity is undisputed.

Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan delivered the judgment.

Kerala High Court Dismisses Contempt Petition Against Businessman Kochouseph Chittilappilly

Case Title: S. Aswakumar v. Kochouseph Chittilappilly

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 545

The Kerala High Court recently dismissed the criminal contempt case initiated against businessman Kochouseph Chittilappilly for allegedly making remarks against a sitting judge.

The Division Bench of Dr. Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. set aside the Advocate General's order granting sanction to initiate contempt proceedings against Chitillapilly.

Kerala High Court Directs Customized Police Clearance Certificate With Details On Pending Criminal Cases To Rapper Vedan To Perform Abroad

Case Title: Hiran Das Murali v. Regional Passport Officer and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 546

The Kerala High Court recently directed the Regional Passport Officer, Ernakulam to issue a customized Police Clearance Certificate (PCC) to Malayalam rapper Vedan to enable him to perform abroad.

Justice Murali Purushothaman was considering a writ petition filed by Vedan, officially known as Hirandas, who sought a Police Clearance Certificate after he was invited to perform in UK and Ireland.

Kerala High Court Directs Govt To Consider Representation For Inclusion Of Rugby In State School Games

Case Title: Ameya Sandeep (Minor) v State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 547

The Kerala High Court has directed the State Government to consider a representation seeking the inclusion of rugby in the Kerala State School Athletic and Games Meet.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas issued the direction while disposing of a writ petition filed by a plus one student who is a rugby player. The petitioner claimed to have participated in the 2026 National Rugby Championships in the Girls Under-18 category.

Husband's Consent Not Required For Muslim Wife To Invoke 'Khula' Divorce; Family Court Need Not Conduct Detailed Inquiry: Kerala High Court

Case Title : K v. I

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 548

The Kerala High Court recently clarified that husband's consent or acceptance is immaterial when Muslim wife invokes extra-judicial divorce in the form of 'Khula'.

The Division Bench of Justice J. Nisha Banu and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen held:

“'Khula' is the form of divorce conferred upon the wife similar to 'talaq' conferred upon the husband. The recognition of 'khula' as a form of divorce is directly available from the Holy Quran. In Chapter II Verses 228-229, Quran confers rights on both husband and wife to unilaterally divorce the spouse. The husband cannot refuse to accede to the request of the wife. The validity of 'khula' does not depend upon the acceptance or consent of the husband; rather, it constitutes a right available to the wife for dissolution of the marriage. The significance of invoking 'khula' is absolute.”

Public Objection Alone Can't Be Ground To Reject Explosives Licence Unless Backed By Valid Ground Under Rules: Kerala High Court

Case Title: K.P. Babu v. Land Revenue Commissioner and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 549

The Kerala High Court has observed that a public opinion or public objection cannot be considered as a reason to reject an application for explosive license, unless accompanied by a valid ground recognisable in the Explosive Rules.

Justice C. Jayachandran was considering a writ petition challenging orders that rejected the petitioner's application for an explosive license.

Low IQ Or Intellectual Disability Won't Make Accused Unfit For Trial If He Can Understand & Participate In Proceedings: Kerala High Court

Case Title: X v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 550

The Kerala High Court recently held that low IQ or intellectual disability would not make an accused unfit for trial if he has the functional capacity to understand and participate in proceedings.

Justice Jobin Sebastian referred to Section 368 [Procedure in case of person with mental illness tried before Court] of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and observed:

“It is significant that the mere fact that an accused has a low IQ or suffers from intellectual disability does not, by itself, render him incapable of making his defence or unfit to stand trial. The statutory test is whether the disability or mental condition is of such a nature as to render the accused incapable of entering upon his defence. Therefore, the existence of an intellectual disability has to be considered in the context of the actual functional capacity of the accused to understand and participate in the proceedings. If the mere existence of intellectual disability or a low IQ were sufficient to render an accused incapable of standing trial, every person suffering from such disability would, irrespective of the degree of functional capacity possessed by him, be excluded from criminal proceedings.”

Kerala High Court Directs Restoration Of Damaged Munakkal Beach Facilities

Case Title: N.A. Thoufeeque v. The State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 551

The Kerala High Court has directed the authorities concerned including the Kerala Maritime Board to examine allegations of damage to public amenities at Munakkal Beach in Thrissur and take appropriate steps for their restoration.

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M issued the direction in a public interest litigation which alleged that 'Muziris Golden Vibes' a public company owned by the Government that manages and develops the Muziris Heritage Project had caused damage to the walkways, steel handrails, wheelchair ramps and lawns at Munakkal Beach.

Kerala High Court Directs Payyanur Muncipality To Demarcate Space For Street Vendors To Avoid Footpath Encroachment

Case Title: Jalaja M. v. The District Police Chief and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 552

The Kerala High Court, in a recent decision, directed the Chairperson of Payyanur Muncipality in Kannur to convene a meeting to demarcate a space for street vendors so that they do not encroach upon any footpath.

Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan remarked:

“Payyanur town needs a practical and humane response to footpath encroachment. It is true that the economic vulnerability of poor street vendors should be recognised; at the same time, we cannot overlook that pedestrians are forced onto the busy road because the pavement has been occupied. If anyone obstructs the public's free movement on the pathway, the Municipality and the police should address it. Street vendors can do business without encroaching on the pathway in a place earmarked for them. The Municipality should make necessary arrangements to ensure that their livelihood is not denied.”

Physical Disability Immaterial If Husband Has Means To Maintain Wife: Kerala High Court

Case Title: A v. D

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 553

The Kerala High Court has recently observed that a person cannot evade his responsibility of maintaining his wife after entering into marriage despite knowing that he is incapable of fulfilling his conjugal obligations.

Justice G. Girish made the observation while dismissing a revision petition filed by a man challenging an order directing him to pay ₹10,000 per month as maintenance to his wife.

Kerala High Court Sets Aside BJP Councillor R Sugathan's Preventive Detention Under KAAPA, Says Illegible Material Supplied To Him

Case Title: Aswathi G.R. v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 554

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (October 6) has set aside the prevention detention of BJP Councillor from Thiruvananthapuram Sugathan R., who is presently detained in Viyyur Jail (Thrissur) as per the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 (KAAPA).

The Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishna S. today delivered the verdict in a writ petition preferred by Sugathan's wife to quash the order of preventive detention passed on June 8 as well as the order of approval issued by the State government.

“Responsibility To Stand By Soldier In Crisis”: Kerala High Court Orders CBI Probe Into 14-Year-Old Disappearance Of Tripura State Rifles Jawan

Case Title: Balan P.K. v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 555

The Kerala High Court has ordered a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the disappearance of a Tripura State Rifles jawan who went missing more than 14 years ago while travelling by train from Kerala to Guwahati.

Justice G. Girish observed,

“Peaceful sleep of the civilian is at the cost of sleepless nights, vigilance and sacrifice of the soldier. The civilian society of the Nation in return, owes a responsibility to stand by the soldier who protects them, in case he faces a crisis in personal life.”

S.69 BNS | Hiding Live-In Relationship, Child With Another Amount To 'Deceitful Means' To Have Sexual Intercourse With Woman: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Udayan v. X and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 556

The Kerala High Court recently held that hiding live-in relationship with another woman and child born in it would amount to 'deceitful means' employed to have sexual intercourse with a woman as per Section 69 BNS.

Justice A. Badharudeen made the observation while considering a plea for anticipatory bail under Section 18A of the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act.

Kerala High Court Refuses To Quash Cruelty Case Against In-Laws Accused Of Calling Woman 'Servant', 'Cancer In Their Life'

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

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 557

The Kerala High Court recently refused to quash the matrimonial cruelty case against the parents-in-law of a woman, who allegedly referred to her as 'servant without wages' and 'cancer in their lives'.

Justice G. Girish observed that there are multiple incidents of matrimonial cruelty attributed against the husband's parents and that the same are prima facie sufficient to attract the offence under Section 498A IPC. It was opined that the veracity of the same are to be tested in trial and the case cannot be quashed at the present stage.

'Undue Fetter' On Right Of Appeal: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Order Requiring 50% Maintenance Deposit For Delay Condonation

Case Title: Anilkumar v. Anitha Kumari and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 558

The Kerala High Court recently held that courts cannot impose deposit of a percentage of the award amount as condition while considering an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone delay in preferring an appeal.

Justice Jobin Sebastian opined that such a condition may be justified when the appellate court is considering an application for stay of execution of the award but not while considering an application for condonation of delay.

SFI Activist Abhimanyu Murder: Kerala High Court Refuses In-Camera Trial, But Bars Photography/ Video-Recording Of Accused In Courtroom

Case Title: Mohammed J.I. and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 559

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (October 7) declined the plea for in-camera trial in the SFI activist Abhimanyu murder case which is pending before the Sessions Court, Ernakulam.

Justice C.S. Dias upheld the order of the trial court that dismissed the accused's request for in-camera trial.

The Court, however, directed the trial court to ensure that there is no photography or video-recording of the trial or the accused while they are inside the courtroom.

Kerala High Court Grants Relief To Headmistress Denied Entry For Wearing Churidar Instead Of Saree, Says 'Dress Choice A Fundamental Right'

Case Title: Sindhu S. Nair. v. State of Kerala and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 560

The Kerala High Court recently ordered police protection after the manager of a school obstructed the headmistress' entry for wearing churidar instead of saree.

Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan also declared that a citizen's choice of attire is a part of fundamental right:

“What dress one wears is ordinarily a matter of personal choice of every citizen of this country. No one or society as a whole can dictate how a citizen should dress without the backing of the law. This is a part of the fundamental rights of every citizen…I declare that a citizen's attire is his/her choice, and nobody can insist that it conform to society's customs, nor can anybody dictate that it be in a manner acceptable to society, especially when no law backs it. These are individual choices of the citizen. If any such dictate is made, it is the duty of the law-enforcing authority to take appropriate steps in accordance with law forthwith.”

Goshree Islands Development Authority Entitled To Set Up Commercial Kiosks At Kochi's Queen's Walkway: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Goshree Islands Development Authority (GIDA) and Anr. v. Tritvam Apartment Owners Association (TAOA) and Ors. and M/s C. Jacob & Company v. Tritvam Apartment

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 561

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (October 7) held that the Goshree Islands Development Authority (GIDA) is entitled to set up commercial kiosks at the Queen's Walkway in Kochi.

The Division Bench of Dr. Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Preeta A.K. set aside an order of the Single Bench, which barred construction of the kiosks citing that the same would affect the legal rights of the pedestrians.

Waqf Tribunal Can Permit Interrogatories Under Order XI CPC: Kerala High Court

Case Title: The Kerala State Waqf Board v M.K. Venu and Ors. and connected case

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 562

The Kerala High Court has held that a Waqf Tribunal possesses the power to permit parties to deliver interrogatories under Order XI of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) as it is deemed as a civil court under Section 83(5) of the Waqf Act, 1995.

A Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishna S. delivered the judgment in appeals filed by the Kerala State Waqf Board challenging the orders of the Waqf Tribunal that allowed the delivery of interrogatories to the State Waqf Board.

Obscene Words, General Abuse At Woman Not Offence U/S 354A(1)(iv) IPC If No Allegation Of Sexually Coloured Remark: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Prasad Mahendragiri v. State of Kerala and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 563

The Kerala High Court recently held that utterance of general abuse or obscene words at a woman without any specific allegation of a sexually coloured remark would not attract the offence of sexual harassment as per Section 354A(1)(iv) of the Indian Penal Code.

Justice Jobin Sebastian observed:

“the mere utterance of obscene words would not, by itself, automatically attract an offence under Section 354A(1)(iv) of the IPC. There must be a specific allegation that the accused had made sexually coloured remarks against the de facto complainant. A general abuse directed at a woman does not, by itself, constitute an offence under Section 354A(1)(iv) of the IPC.”

Authorized Govt Officer's Complaint Not Needed When Notary Intentionally Participates In Document Forgery: Kerala High Court

Case Title: P. Imbichi Koya v. State of Kerala and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 564

The Kerala High Court recently held that an authorized government officer's complaint is not necessary to prosecute a notary, who intentionally participates in document forgery.

Justice A. Badharudeen held that the afore protection provided under Section 13(1) of the Notaries Act would be applicable only when the notary is performing the duties under the statute.

'Courts Must Appoint Guardians For Dementia/Alzheimer's Patients If Circumstances Warrant': Kerala High Court

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

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 565

The Kerala High Court, in a recent decision, appointed a guardian for a 93-year-old woman with dementia and Alzheimer's disease while considering her sister's plea under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas remarked that courts must appoint guardians for persons with dementia or Alzheimer's disease if the conditions get worse and if satisfied that the circumstances warrant it.

Kerala High Court Directs Police To Strictly Enforce Public Smoking Ban, Calls For Awareness Drives

Case Title: Prof. Monamma Kokkad v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 566

The Kerala High Court has recently directed the State Police to continue complying with its earlier judgment prohibiting smoking in public places and strictly enforce the applicable statutory provisions.

The Court further directed the government authorities to conduct awareness programmes on the legal prohibition and the harmful effects of passive smoking.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M.issued the directions while disposing of a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by retired professor Monamma Kokkad, who alleged that the prohibition against public smoking was not being effectively enforced across Kerala.

Kerala High Court Directs FIR Against Ex-CM Pinarayi Vijayan, Daughter Based On ED Information In CMRL-Exalogic Case

Case Title: Adv. K.M. Shajahan v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 567

The Kerala High Court on Friday (October 9) directed the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau to register an FIR incorporating offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act against Leader of Opposition Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter Veena and son-in-law Mohammed Riyas in the CMRL-Exalogic payoff case.

Justice A. Badharudeen further held that the government's decision to conduct preliminary enquiry without registration of FIR is illegal considering the facts of the case since the Directorate of Enforcement passed on information regarding commission of PC Act offences while investigating offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act [PMLA].

'Casual And Lackadaisical Investigation By CBI': Kerala High Court Orders Further Probe Into Violinist Balabhaskar's Death

Case Title: K.C. Unni and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 568

The Kerala High Court on Friday (October 9) ordered further investigation into the death of violinist Balabhaskar, who had a fatal car accident in 2018.

Justice G. Girish allowed the plea preferred by the late musician's parents and directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to entrust the investigation to an officer of proven integrity, not below the rank of Additional Superintendent of Police.

Hitting Chest With Elbow Does Not Show Intent To Outrage Woman's Modesty: Kerala High Court Reverses Conviction

Case Title: Rajendran v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 569

The Kerala High Court has acquitted a man convicted under Section 354 IPC, holding that the alleged act of hitting a woman on her chest with an elbow, in the circumstances of the case, did not establish the requisite intention to outrage her modesty.

Justice Jobin Sebastian allowed the criminal revision petition and set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Chalakudy, which had subsequently been affirmed by the Additional Sessions Court-III, Thrissur.

'Make Data Protection Board Functional In 8 Weeks': Kerala High Court In PIL Raising Privacy Concerns In 'Digi Yatra'

Case Title: C.R. Neelakandan v. Union of India and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 570

The Kerala High Court recently disposed of a public interest litigation that raised concerns over the protection of passengers' personal data collected at airports through digital systems, such as Digi Yatra.

When the matter came up on Wednesday, the Division Bench of Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. observed:

"The issue raised by the writ petitioner cannot be ignored, as we find that the privacy of citizens is being compromised."

S.69 Indian Succession Act | Kerala High Court Upholds Law On Automatic Revocation Of Christian Wills Upon Marriage

Case Title: Suo Motu Civil Reference v. Union of India and Ors. & connected cases

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 571

The Kerala High Court, in a recent judgment, upheld the constitutional validity of Section 69 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, which provides for automatic revocation of Wills made by Christians, upon their marriage.

The Division Bench of Justice Sathish Ninan and Justice P. Krishna Kumar observed that the provision has a laudable object and that it is not unfair, unfavourable or prejudicial merely because of non-applicability to Hindus.

Indian Succession Act | Different Treatment Of Hindu And Christian Wills Upon Testator's Marriage 'Not Discriminatory': Kerala High Court

Case Title: Suo Motu Civil Reference v. Union of India and Ors. & connected cases

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 571

The Kerala High Court, in a recent decision, held that the differential treatment of wills made by Christians and Hindus upon marriage of the testator, as contemplated under Indian Succession Act, 1925, is not discriminatory.

The Division Bench of Justice Sathish Ninan and Justice P. Krishna Kumar upheld the provision, which was challenged on the ground that it is arbitrary in application to Hindus and Christians.

Kerala High Court Directs Disbursal Of Balance Financial Aid To Transgender Person For Post Sex-Reassignment Surgery Treatments

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

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 572

The Kerala High Court recently directed for the disbursal of the balance amount out of the mandatory financial aid payable to a transgender person towards post sex reassignment surgery (SRS) treatments.

Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan allowed the plea preferred by a transgender person alleging that he was not disbursed with the financial aid stipulated for post-operative treatments.

Alleged Failure To Assess Decree-Holder's Mental Capacity Can't Be Reopened Under S. 47 CPC After Decree Attains Finality: Kerala High Court

Case Title: James V. Kurian and Ors. v V.K. Sam and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 573

The Kerala High Court has held that an alleged failure to inquire into a decree-holders's mental capacity cannot be reopened under Section 47 CPC after the decree has attained finality.

Justice C.S. Dias observed that the objection could not be reopened at the execution stage after the issue had been raised in the earlier rounds of litigation and the decree had attained finality.

Kerala High Court Sets Aside Order Allowing Co-Education In Girls' School; Says Rival Claims Of Nearby Boys' School Be Heard

Case Title: K.A. Muhammed Ashraf and Anr. v. Muslim Girls' Higher Secondary School and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 574

The Kerala High Court recently set aside a Single Bench order directing the Erattupetta Municipality Secretary to grant approval for introducing co-education scheme in Muslim Girls' Higher Secondary School, Erattupetta— a girls-only school.

The Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishna S. was considering a writ appeal filed by the manager of a nearby boys' school and one K.A. Muhammed Ashraf (1^st appellant), who had previously filed another plea (W.P.(C) No. 13677 of 2026) challenging the co-education plan.

Kerala High Court Directs Speedy Decision In Jiostar's Appeal Against Halt On 'Anali' Series Allegedly Based On Koodathayi Murders

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

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 575

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (October 13) directed the expeditious hearing and disposal of an appeal filed by Jiostar Pvt. Ltd. challenging a temporary injunction passed restraining the release of Hotstar webseries Anali, which is allegedly based on the Koodathayi murders.

The Bench of Justice Easwaran S. passed a direction:

"Since the appeal is against a grant of injunction, it would be appropriate that this Court directs the 2nd Additional Sub Court to finally dispose of the appeal after hearing the parties on or before 31.10.2026"

SFI Activist Abhimanyu Murder Case: Kerala High Court Refuses To Halt Trial Till Completion Of Probe Against Co-Accused

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

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 576

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (October 13) refused to halt the trial in the murder of SFI Activist Abhimanyu, which is pending before the Sessions Court, Ernakulam.

Justice C. Jayachandran dismissed the plea preferred by accused nos. 24 and 25, finding that there are no merits in it.

Teachers Can't Face Criminal Action For Trivial Corrective Measures To Maintain Classroom Discipline: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Jolly John v. State of Kerala and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 577

The Kerala High Court recently quashed the criminal case initiated against a teacher, who was accused of offences under the Juvenile Justice Act and the Indian Penal Code for pulling the hand of her student and causing injury to her.

Justice Jobin Sebastian noted that the teacher did not have any mala fide intention and only wanted to maintain discipline in the classroom since the complainant student was running around.

Courts Must View CDs, Videos Themselves Before Convicting For Obscenity: Kerala High Court Acquits Man

Case Title: Najeeb v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 578

The Kerala High Court recently reversed a concurrent finding of guilt of a man, who was convicted under Section 292 IPC for the sale of obscene CDs in his shop.

Justice Jobin Sebastian relied on the decision in Harikumar v. State of Kerala and held that conviction based solely on the testimony of the investigating officer is not valid since the trial court did not independently verify whether the contents were obscene.

Sreekrishnapuram Double Murder: Kerala High Court Directs Comparison Of Fingerprints In Aadhar Database To Trace Culprits

Case Title: The State Of Kerala Represented By Deputy Superintendent Of Police v. Govt. of India and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 579

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (October 14) gave a direction for comparison of the fingerprints of the suspects of the Sreekrishnapuram Double Murder case with those stored in the Aadhar database.

Justice G. Girish gave the direction to the Union and the Deputy Director of Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) in a plea preferred by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch, Palakkad.

Kerala High Court Rejects Former CM Pinarayi Vijayan's Plea To Challenge Vigilance FIR Direction In CMRL-Exalogic Case

Case Title: Pinarayi Vijayan v. Adv. K.M. Shajahan and Ors., Veena T. v. Adv. K.M. Shajahan and Ors., Mohammed Riyas P.A. v. Adv. K.M. Shajahan and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 580

The Kerala High Court on Thursday (October 15) refused to grant permission to former Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, daughter Veena T. and son-in-law/ex-Minister Muhammed Riyas to appeal against the Single Bench order directing Vigilance FIR against them in CMRL-Exalogic pay off case.

The Division Bench of Justice K. Natarajan and Justice Johnson John today dismissed the leave petitions filed by the three seeking permission to appeal against the order.

Father's Remarriage, Second Child No Ground To Reduce Maintenance For Child From First Marriage: Kerala High Court

Case Title: S v J

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 581

The Kerala High Court has observed that a man remarrying and having a child in the wedlock cannot be a legally recognisable defence to reduce maintenance amount for a child born in his first marriage.

Justice C. Jayachandran made the observation while considering a revision petition challenging a maintenance order issued by the Family Court, Kollam.

Sabarimala Gold Theft: Kerala High Court Rejects Accused Jeweller Govardhan's Plea For Permission To Travel Abroad

Case Title: Roddam Pandurangaiah Naga Govardhan v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 582

The Kerala High Court on Thursday (October 15) rejected the pleas moved by Sabarimala Gold Theft accused Roddam Pandurangaiah Naga Govardhan seeking permission to travel abroad for his daughter's graduation.

Justice A. Badharudeen dismissed the pleas, which were preferred after the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Kollam refused to release his passport or to permit him to travel to Australia for the graduation ceremony.

Kerala High Court Directs State To Appoint Special Public Prosecutors Exclusively For POCSO Cases Within Six Weeks

Case Title: District Court Bar Association and Anr. v State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 583

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (14 October) directed the State Government to appoint Special Public Prosecutors exclusively for cases under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) within six weeks.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. delivered the judgment while disposing of a public interest litigation which challenged a government order which permitted the Special Public Prosecutors appointed for POCSO cases to conduct non-POCSO cases instituted under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act.

New Safety Norms For Permanent Fireworks Shops Don't Apply To Temporary Festival Shops: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Prasanth K. v the District Collector and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 584

The Kerala High Court has held that the amended requirements under Rules 83 and 86 of the Explosives Rules, 2008, meant for permanent fireworks shops, cannot be insisted upon while considering applications for temporary fireworks shops.

Justice G. Girish was considering a plea seeking directions to the authorities to consider an application for a temporary fireworks shop licence without applying the requirements introduced by the amendments.

Kerala High Court Orders Police Protection To Inter-Faith Couple; Bars Parents From Taking Mobile, Interfering In Relation Or Job Prospects

Case Title: X v. The District Police Chief and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 585

The Kerala High Court recently came to the aid of an adult woman in an inter-faith relationship, who was alleged detained by her parents by taking away her mobile phone and interfering in her relation.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. was considering a habeas corpus plea filed by the man whom she was in a relationship with.

Kerala High Court Disposes Plea Seeking Vigilance Probe into Appointment of Bodybuilders Shinu Chova and Chitharesh Natesan as Police Inspectors

Case Title: Adv. K.M. Shajahan v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 586

The Kerala High Court on Friday (16 October) disposed of a petition seeking a vigilance inquiry into the appointment of bodybuilders Chitharesh Natesan and Shinu Chovva as Armed Police Inspectors in the Kerala Police, observing that the legality of the government order denying prior approval for an inquiry under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act can be challenged separately.

Justice A. Badharudeen delivered the judgment.

Failure To Supply Detention Order In Language Known To Detenu Violates Article 22(5): Kerala High Court Quashes Detention Of Karnataka Man

Case Title: Ayishath Ruksana v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 587

The Kerala High Court recently clarified that the detaining authority is bound to supply the detention order and material documents to a detenue in a language known to him and omission to do so violates fundamental rights under Article 22(5) of the Constitution.

The Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishna S. set aside the preventive detention of a Kannada-speaking man, who was detained under the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 (KAAP Act), after noting that he was not supplied with translated copies of the order and material documents.

Kerala High Court Orders Re-Trial In Convict's Appeal After Finding Trial Court Acquitted Him Of Attempt To Rape Despite Victim's Sterling Testimony

Case Title : Biju v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 588

The Kerala High Court recently ordered re-trial while considering a convict's appeal after finding that the trial court acquitted him of 'attempt to rape' charges despite the victim giving a sterling testimony.

Justice A. Badharudeen further clarified that though an appellate court cannot suo motu enhance the conviction or punishment awarded to an accused while considering his appeal, it is empowered to order a re-trial as per the Apex Court decision in Nagarajan v. State of Tamil Nadu.

Police Can Contact Adult Woman Reported To Be Missing, But Can't Compel Her To Return Home : Kerala High Court

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

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 589

The Kerala High Court recently remarked that the police contacting an adult woman, who was reported missing, in order to complete the investigation would not amount to harassment. It, however, added that the police cannot compel her to return home if she does not wish to do so.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas made the observation while hearing a plea filed by a woman alleging harassment by the police.

Captive Elephant Rules | Govt Or HC Can't Extend Timeline Set By Supreme Court For Temples To Register : Kerala High Court

Case Title: Ravi E. and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 590

The Kerala High Court has clarified that neither the High Court nor the State government can extend the timeline set by the Apex Court for temples and devaswoms to register themselves in the District Committee constituted under the Kerala Captive Elephant (Management and Maintenance) Rules, 2012.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas passed the decision referring to the directions laid by the Supreme Court in of Wildlife Rescue and Rehabilitation Centre and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. (2016).

Kerala High Court Orders SBI To Refund ₹3.73L To Cybercrime Victim, Says Bank Did Not Prove 'Negligence' By Her

Case Title: Remadevi T.L. v. Reserve Bank of India and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 591

The Kerala High Court, in a recent decision, ordered the State Bank of India (SBI) to refund an amount of ₹3.73 lakhs to a customer, who got scammed and reported about the cybercrime within 24 hours.

Justice Harisankar V. Menon observed that the bank did not prove that she was privy to the fraudulent transaction and that she is entitled to be found to have 'zero liability' when she reported the fraud to the bank as well as the police promptly.

Prolonged Investigation Without Progress Can Violate Accused's Article 21 Rights: Kerala High Court Quashes Sexual Harassment FIR

Case Title : Mohammed Shameer Ali v. State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 592

The Kerala High Court recently quashed a sexual harassment case against a man after noting that there was an inordinate delay of 8 years in completing the investigation, mainly due to the non-cooperation by the defacto complainant.

Justice Jobin Sebastian considered the question as to whether mere filing of an undetected report by the police would confer a right upon the accused to seek quashing of FIR and answered it in the negative.

Plea Challenging Constitution Of Kerala Bar Council Committees Withdrawn Following Plan To Reconstitute Them

Case Title : Yeshwant Shenoy v. Bar Council of Kerala

Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 593

The Kerala High Court has permitted the withdrawal of a plea challenging the formation of statutory committees of the Bar Council of Kerala.

Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan dismissed the petition as it was withdrawn.

The Court had previously issued notice to the Bar Council of Kerala in the plea. The plea filed by advocate Yeshwant Shenoy, an elected member of the XXII Bar Council of Kerala alleged that the constitution of statutory committees of the council did not follow the statutory procedures.

State Can't Escape Liability For Harm Caused By Wild Animals Merely Because It Does Not Own Or Control Them: Kerala High Court

Case Title : The State of Kerala and ors. v. Sebastian @ Sabu V K

Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 594

The Kerala High Court has held that the State's lack of ownership or physical custody over wild animals does not, by itself exclude the State from the liability for harm caused by them.

Justice Mohammed Nias C.P., made the observation while dismissing a Regular Second Appeal filed by the State against the concurrent findings of the Munsiff's Court, Kalpetta, and the Sub Court, Sulthanbathery.

Placing Penis On Minor's Vagina Can Amount To 'Penetrative Sexual Assault' Under POCSO Act: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Shaji v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 595

The Kerala High Court recently clarified that placing of penis on minor's vagina amounts to penetrative sexual assault under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).

Justice A. Badharudeen observed that 'placing' penis on vagina after removing a child's underwear would amount to slightest degree of 'penetration', attracting the offence of penetrative sexual assault. He added that it is not the same as 'touching', which would attract the offence of sexual assault under Section 7 POCSO Act.

Mere Possession Of Fake ISI Mark Not An Offence Without Proof Of Its Use: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Bureau of Indian Standards v. M/s. Mars Veneers and Boards and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 596

The Kerala High Court recently clarified that the mere possession of spurious/fake ISI mark is not punishable under the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986 unless its actual use is proved.

Justice A. Badharudeen referred to Sections 11, 12 and 13 of the BIS Act and held:

“In both sections 11 and 12, the legislature vigilantly incorporated the word 'used' and the legislature in its wisdom never intended the word 'possess' to fasten criminal culpability on mere possession of a spurious ISI mark…On scanning the statutory words in Sections 11 and 12, read with Section 33 of the BIS Act, the 'use' of a spurious ISI mark is punishable under the said provisions and mere possession of an object capable of affixing such a mark, without any evidence to establish its use in the manufacture of goods, does not attract the penal provisions of Sections 11 and 12, read with Section 33 of the BIS Act.”

Kerala High Court Underscores 'Peer Restraint' Among Benches, Says Judicial Strength Flows From Discipline, Not Dominion

Case Title: I. Bindhu v. M/s Thiruvananthapuram Service Co-operative and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 597

The Kerala High Court has recently observed that all Judges are equal in status and power and that no Bench, irrespective of its strength, can assume a supervisory role over another or advise, counsel or criticise Judges on how they should act or record their decisions.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice Basant Balaji made the observations while considering a writ appeal.

Kerala High Court Expunges Adverse Remarks Against Young Advocate, Stresses Lawyers' Role In Preserving Integrity Of Justice Delivery System

Case Title: SadiqaIi M v. Federal Bank and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 598

The Kerala High Court has recently emphasised that the integrity of the justice delivery system depends not only on the accuracy of judicial decisions but also on the credibility, probity and professional conduct of the lawyers who participate in the process.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice Basant Balaji made the observation in an appeal seeking to expunge a portion of adverse observations made against an advocate in a judgment.
Kerala High Court Strikes Down Guideline Restricting Production Of Arrested Persons Before Magistrates After 5 PM

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

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 599

The Kerala High Court on Friday (23 October) set aside the State Government's guidelines that preferred the production of arrested persons before Judicial Officers between 10 AM and 5 PM and treated production after 5 PM as permissible only in exceptional circumstances.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and Justice K.V. Jayakumar observed,

"The provisions must accordingly be examined against the requirement that an arrested person be afforded prompt judicial scrutiny, timely access to legal assistance and an effective opportunity to challenge the legality of arrest and detention, while preserving the investigating agency's ability to undertake lawful and time-sensitive investigative steps. An executive protocol cannot dilute the safeguards guaranteed by the Constitution and the governing statute, whether directly or through procedural arrangements that have the effect of discouraging compliance with them. Though the State is entitled to adopt reasonable measures for the safety of Judicial Officers and other persons involved in the remand process, those measures must operate consistently with the statutory powers of investigation, the duty to produce an arrested person without unnecessary delay, and the constitutional protection of personal liberty."

Kerala High Court Denies Judge's Plea To Engage Lawyer In Disciplinary Inquiry, Says He Can Take Assistance Of Another Judge

Case Title: X v. The Registrar (District Judiciary) and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 600

The Kerala High Court recently upheld the denial of a serving Additional District Judge's request to engage a lawyer in disciplinary proceedings against him, holding that he could take the assistance of another judicial officer to defend himself. The Court noted that the charges, though serious, were not complicated.

Justice P. Gopinath observed:

“the charges against the petitioner may be serious. However, they are not complicated in themselves. The petitioner, with the assistance of another officer in the cadre of District Judge, can very well defend those charges.”

Kerala High Court Quashes Film Producer's ₹1.9 Crore Cheating Case Against Nivin Pauly, Abrid Shine; Notes Settlement

Case Title: Nivin Pauly v. State of Kerala and Ors., Abrid Shine v. State of Kerala and Anr., P.S. Shamnas v. State of Kerala and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 601

The Kerala High Court on Monday (October 26) quashed the crime registered against Malayalam film actor Nivin Pauly and director Abrid Shine at the instance of producer P.S. Shamnas alleging commission of fraud of ₹1.9 crore.

The Court also quashed the criminal case initiated against Shamnas alleging forgery of Nivin's signature in documents submitted to the Kerala Film Chamber of Commerce.

Justice P.V. Balakrishnan noted that a settlement was reached between the parties and that they no longer had any grievances against each other.

Statutory Restrictions Can't Curtail Article 226 Powers To Order FIR, Investigation Where Cognizable Offence Made Out: Kerala High Court

Case Title: M.R. Ajayan v The Director, CBI and Anr.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 602

The Kerala High Court has held that statutory restrictions cannot curtail its constitutional powers under Article 226 of the Constitution to direct registration of a First Information Report (FIR) or an investigation where the materials before it disclose a cognizable offence warranting such action.

Justice A. Badharudeen delivered the judgment in a petition seeking direction to the Central Bureau of Investigation and the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) to examine the alleged involvement of four individuals in an ongoing corruption investigation concerning officials of the Enforcement Directorate's Kochi Zonal Office.

Co-operative Society Employee Need Not Exhaust Departmental Appeal Before Approaching Labour Court: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Chokkad Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v Labour Court and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 603

The Kerala High Court has held that an employee of a co-operative society need not exhaust the statutory appellate remedy available under Rule 198(4) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969, before approaching the Labour Court under Section 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Justice Viju Abraham delivered the judgment in an appeal filed by the Chokkad Service Co-operative Bank challenging the order of the Labour Court, Kozhikode

Justice P.V. Balakrishnan noted that a settlement was reached between the parties and that they no longer had any grievances against each other.

Kerala High Court Allows Cybercrime Victim To Use Bank Account Frozen Over ₹1.16 Crore Fraud

Case Title: Radhika Menon v. Branch Manager and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 604

The Kerala High Court recently directed Axis Bank to permit a cybercrime victim to operate and close her frozen bank account ignoring the requisition of ₹1.16 crores on the account.

Justice M.A. Abdul Hakhim was considering a writ petition preferred seeking a direction to the bank to unfreeze the account held in the name of the petitioner's LPG distributorship.

Kerala High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail To Lawyer Accused Of Sexually Harassing Junior Lady Advocate

Case Title: X v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 605

The Kerala High Court recently granted pre-arrest bail to a lawyer, who is accused of sexually harassing a junior lady advocate practicing in Palakkad courts.

Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath granted bail after observing that custodial interrogation was not necessary.

Kerala High Court Strikes Down Rule Prohibiting Women From Working In Toddy Shops, Says It Violates Articles 14, 15, 19 & 21

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

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 606

The Kerala High Court recently struck down Rule 7(37) of the Kerala Abkari Shops Disposal Rules, 2002 that prohibits employment of women in any capacity in toddy shops.

Justice P. Gopinath relied on Apex Court decision Anuj Garg and Ors. v. Hotel Association of India and observed that Rule 7(37) of the 2002 Rules is unconstitutional for being violative of Articles 14, 15, 19 and 21 of the Constitution.

Medical Negligence: Kerala High Court Orders SIT Probe After Woman Loses Nine Fingers In Cosmetic Surgery

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

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 607

The Kerala High Court recently directed the constitution of a Special Investigation Team of the Crime Branch to conduct further investigation in a high-profile medical negligence case involving 'Cosmetiq Hospital' in which a woman lost 9 fingers and developed serious medical complications after a cosmetic surgery.

Justice G. Girish noted that the hospital had the status of a 'day surgery centre' at the time of the petitioner's complex surgery and felt that a re-investigation was necessary on certain aspects to determine whether there was criminal negligence on the part of the accused persons running the hospital.

Kerala High Court Upholds Denial Of OBC Non-Creamy Layer Certificate To Daughter Of Directly Recruited Judge

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

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 608

The Kerala High Court has upheld the rejection of an OBC Non-Creamy Layer (NCL) certificate to the daughter of a woman judge directly recruited to the Class I post, who sought reservation benefits for CLAT 2027.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and Justice K. V. Jayakumar held that the criteria applicable to officers directly recruited to Class I posts cannot be mixed with those governing officers who enter such posts through promotion from lower service categories.

Citing Victim's Privacy, Kerala High Court Denies CCTV Copies To POCSO Accused, Allows Counsel To View Footage

Case Title: Rajan Babu v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 609

The Kerala High Court, in a recent order, struck a balance between the accused's right to fair trial and the victim's right to privacy by permitting the accused's counsel to view a CCTV footage taken at the place of occurrence while refusing to give a copy of the same in order to safeguard a POCSO victim's privacy.

Justice Jobin Sebastian directed the trial judge to make arrangements to enable the accused's counsel to view the footage inside the courtroom and to take down necessary notes to facilitate the cross-examination of the witnesses.

Vizhinjam Port : Kerala High Court Quashes Govt Order Forming Expert Committee To Examine Coastal Erosion

Case Title: Nirmala Johny and Ors. v State of Kerala and Ors.

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 610

The Kerala High Court on Friday (30 October) declared the constitution of an Expert Committee appointed by the State Government to examine allegations of coastal erosion caused by the Vizhinjam International Deepwater Multipurpose Seaport project as flawed.

Justice Harisankar V Menon issued the directions in a writ petition instituted by the residents of of fishing villages situated within 20 kilometres north of Vizhinjam, who alleged that the construction of the seaport, particularly its breakwaters, had resulted in substantial coastal erosion on the northern side and accretion on the southern side.