Kerala High Court Monthly Digest: April 2022 [Citations:155- 200]

Judgments This Week

Case Title: Beksy A v. District Collector & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 160

The Court recently reiterated that the marriage of an individual from one caste to another as permitted by law has no relevance for the purpose of claiming the benefit of reservation under Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India. Observing so, Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan allowed the plea moved by a woman who had challenged the order rejecting her application for a caste certificate citing that she had married to another caste, and thus not eligible for the same.

7. Rape On False Promise Of Marriage Can't Be Presumed Merely Because Accused Married Another Woman After Sex With Prosecutrix : Kerala High Court

Case Title: Ramachandran @ Chandran v. State of Kerala & Anr

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 161

The Court has delivered a noteworthy judgment explaining when sex on the promise of marriage can amount to rape. Setting aside the conviction of a man for the offence of rape on false promise of marriage, the Court clarified merely because the accused contracted another marriage immediately after the sexual act with the victim, it cannot give rise to the presumption of lack of consent.

8. Advocate Who Voluntarily Suspended Legal Practice For Govt Employment No Longer A Member Of The Bar: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Saumya M.S. v. State of Kerala & Ors

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 162

The Court recently ruled that a serving Government employee, who had earlier secured enrollment as an Advocate and had later suspended his legal practice for taking up the above Government employment, cannot be treated as a "member of the Bar" for the purpose of selection and appointment as Assistant Public Prosecutor Grade II. A Division Bench of Justice Alexander Thomas and Justice Viju Abraham observed that this was so since as per the Advocates Act and Bar Council of India Rules, a person who was initially enrolled as an Advocate and later voluntarily suspended from legal practice is not entitled to practise as an Advocate.

9. Kerala High Court Asks State To Revisit The Procedure For Search & Seizure In Abkari Cases

Case Title: Anil Kumar A.B. v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 163

While directing the State to compensate two persons who were falsely implicated in Abkari cases, the Court addressed a question concerning the search, seizure and arrest procedure in abkari cases in the State and opined that the State Government should take serious note of the same. The petitioners were arrested and in confinement for more than 50 days in connection with two separate Abkari cases. They were subsequently found to be innocent and were exonerated by the investigating agency by filing subsequent reports before the Court concerned.

Also Read: 'Jail Is Jail': Kerala High Court Asks State To Pay ₹2.5 Lakhs To Two Persons Falsely Implicated & Detained For Over 50 Days

10. Can't Deny Public Employment On Basis Of Place Of Residence/ Domicile: Kerala High Court Reiterates

Case Title: Liji A.S v. State of Kerala & Ors

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 164

The Kerala High Court recently observed that a candidate cannot be denied public employment merely on the ground that she is not a resident or domicile of a particular location. Ruling so, Justice V.G. Arun set aside a resolution and declared that the Panchayat cannot deny an appointment to the most meritorious candidate for the reason that she is not a resident of the Panchayat.

11. Kerala High Court Refuses To Reschedule KUHS Final Year MBBS Exam

Case Title: Manju A.& Ors v. Kerala University of Health and Sciences & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 165

The Court refused to reschedule the dates of the III Professional MBBS Degree Part-II Examinations to be conducted by the Kerala University of Health and Sciences (KUHS) in the plea moved by a large group of medical students from the State. Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan however clarified that students who failed to appear for the examination on March 31 should be permitted to appear along with their junior batch in the exams which are tentatively scheduled to be held on 19.9.2022, or such other date as modified by the Board of Examinations.

12. Kerala High Court Orders Expeditious Appointment Of Veterinary Staff In Lakshadweep

Case Title: Dr. C.P. Abdul Kabeer v. Union Territory of Lakshadweep & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 166

The Court while disposing of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) directed the Director of Animal Husbandry to appoint veterinary staff under the Central Government sponsored scheme called 'Livestock Health and Disease Control' in Lakshadweep within three weeks. A Division Bench of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly asked the concerned authorities to expeditiously finalise appointments of veterinary surgeons and other staff, empathising with the plight of the animals and birds on the island deprived of medical attention.

13. Malankara Church Dispute| Offence Of Forgery Not Attracted: Kerala High Court Drops Proceedings Against Persons Accused Of Forging 1934 Constitution

Case Title: M.S Paulose & Anr v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 167

The Court quashed all proceedings against two individuals who were accused of forging the 1934 Constitution of the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church observing that the matter had already been dealt with by the Supreme Court and the case was an instance of abuse of process of court. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A found that the Apex Court had already clarified that the non-registration or the indicated modifications made in the 1934 Constitution cannot be a valid contention to challenge the validity of the document if any petitioner places reliance on it.

14. Initiating Litigation Cannot Be Treated As An Act Of Criminal Conspiracy: Kerala High Court

Case Title: M.S Paulose & Anr v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 168

The Court while quashing proceedings against two individuals who were accused of forging the 1934 Constitution of the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church observed that Initiating litigation cannot be treated as an act of conspiracy as contemplated under Section 120B of the CrPC. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A found that the offence of criminal conspiracy is not attracted in the case since the offence of forgery was not established in the case and particularly because filing a suit cannot be treated as an illegal act.

15. Provide Children With IQ Levels Between 70 -84 Facilities Available To Disabled Persons In SSLC Exam 2022: Kerala High Court Grants Interim Relief

Case Title: Bibin K. B. & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 169

The Court directed the concerned authorities to permit children with an IQ level between 70 and 84 to avail the facilities available to disabled persons in the forthcoming SSLC Examination 2022 pending disposal of a writ petition as an interim relief. A Division Bench of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly directed the Government Pleader to communicate the order of this court to the respondents forthwith and also to the District Medical Officer, Thrissur for implementing this order.

16. Litigant Filing A Case Is A Manifestation Of His Confidence In The Justice Delivery System: Kerala HC Asks Registry To Ensure Expeditious Curing Of Defects

Case Title: Mathew Z Pulikunnel v Smt. Sophy Thomas & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 170

The Court disposed of a contempt petition alleging that the Registry did not list a couple of petitions before a Bench on time despite all the defects being cured and recurring requests from the counsel for the petitioner. A Division Bench of Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P reminded the Registry that the filing of a case by a litigant before this institution is a manifestation of the confidence reposed by the litigant in the justice delivery system in our country.

Case Title: Santosh Kumar K. v. The Commissioner

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 171

The High Court bench of Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas has ruled that the high court cannot waive the statutory mandate of pre-deposit merely on the plea of financial hardships. The court observed that the amendment to section 35F of the Central Excise Act, read with Section 86 of the Finance Act, 1994, clearly manifests the intention of the legislature that the waiver of pre-deposit, which was being resorted to quite often by the courts of law, needed to be amended to make the pre-deposit mandatory. Thus, after the Amendment Act came into force, no discretion is available to the courts of law to waive the mandatory requirement of a pre-deposit of 7.5% even if it is assumed to be onerous.

18. Promise To Marry Made To Married Woman Not Legally Enforceable, Offence Of Rape Not Attracted: Kerala High Court

Case Title: X. v. State Of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 172

The Court has established that the promise alleged to have been made by the accused to a married woman that he would marry her before engaging in sexual relations with her is not enforceable in law and thus it cannot be a ground for the prosecution to argue that the woman had consented due to a misconception of fact. Holding so, Justice Kauser Edappagath quashed all proceedings against the accused observing that according to the sequence of events and the survivor's statement, it appeared to be a consensual act.

19. Forensic Science Labs Need Resuscitation: Kerala High Court Asks State To Upgrade System, FSL Reports To Be Submitted Within 3 Weeks

Case Title: Aneeshkutty v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 173

The Court while releasing a man on bail observed that the forensic science laboratories (FSL) in the State were collapsing and required an upgrade upon noticing that the FSL report in the case was not submitted to the Sessions Court despite the passage of two years. Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V, therefore, suggested that the State government take immediate note of the same and make sure that the system is equipped to submit FSL reports within three weeks of the samples being furnished.

20. Right Of State To Provide Reservations Unaffected By UGC Regulations: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Dr. Abdul Haleem PP v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 174

The Court has established that the regulations notified by the University Grants Commission (UGC) that determine qualifications for selection to various posts in universities in a State do not impact the right of the State government to provide reservations for backward classes. A Division Bench of Justice A.K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P stated that it did not see how the UGC Regulations can affect the reservation policy of a State.

21. Kerala High Court Grants Interim Relief To KSRTC, Directs Oil Companies To Supply High Speed Diesel At Retail Prices

Case Title: Kerala State Road Transport Corporation v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 175

A vacation bench of the Court granted interim relief in the plea moved by the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) challenging the decision of State-owned Oil Marketing Companies to increase the price of diesel sold to the Corporation, which is allegedly much higher than the market price. Justice N. Nagaresh directed the respondents to levy the price of High Speed Diesel (HSD) at par with the price available at retail pumps while clarifying that this relief was subject to the outcome of the petition.

22. Party May Not Press Relief But Can't Prevent Family Court From Finding The Truth: Kerala High Court

Case Title: T. Anjana v. J.A Jayesh Jayaram

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 176

The Court recently held that the master of the proceedings before the Family Court is the presiding officer of the Family Court and not the parties while reiterating that the Family Court is competent to undertake any enquiry to find the truth. A Division Bench of Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Sophy Thomas observed that a party may be able to not press the relief sought, but they cannot refrain the Family Court from the finding of truth.

23. Court Can't Suggest Alternatives When An Educational Agency Has Already Taken A Policy Decision: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Minor v. Ministry of Education

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 177

The Court has established that where a policy decision has been given effect to through a scheme announced by an educational agency, it would not interfere or suggest alternate policies for adoption by the said educational agency. A Division Bench of Justice A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. however permitted a student who attended an urban school to be accommodated in the rural quota of Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya since several seats in the quota was found to be vacant despite the admission process being complete, and the student as found meritorious for admission otherwise.

24. Dissenting Views Of Minority Members Does Not Constitute An Arbitral Award: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Lloyed Insulations (India) Ltd versus Foremexx Space Frames

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 178

The Court has ruled that the Arbitral Tribunal can pass only one arbitral award and not multiple awards. The Bench, consisting of Justices P.B. Suresh Kumar and C.S. Sudha, ruled that the dissenting views of the minority member(s) of an Arbitral Tribunal do not constitute an Arbitral Award, and the dissenting views cannot be made the basis of a proceeding under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) for setting aside the arbitral award or proceedings under Section 36 for its enforcement.

25. Mere Similarities Do Not Attract S.14 Of Copyright Act: Kerala High Court Dismisses Appeal Moved By Broadcasters Of Sitcom 'Uppum Mulakum'

Case Title: Suryansh Broadcasting Pvt Ltd & Anr v. Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 179

The Court has dismissed an appeal moved by the broadcasting team of the popular Malayalam sitcom 'Uppum Mulakum' seeking an injunction on the telecasting of another programme which was allegedly an imitation of the appellant's programme. Justice P. Somarajan observed that although copyright is intended to protect one's work, that does not stop others from adopting the very same theme so long as the theme has an individual quality of its own with an element of innovation from the creator apart from the general theme and its natural sequences.

26. If A Claim Of Tenancy Appears To Be Prima Facie Baseless, Civil Court Can Refuse Reference To Land Tribunal: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Annamma & Ors v. P.V. Varkey & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 180

The High Court while dealing with a tenancy case, established that simply because a contention was raised in the written statement, there is no necessity for the court to refer it to the Land Tribunal if it prima facie appears to be a baseless assertion. Justice A. Badharudeen held that a civil court is only bound to refer a tenancy matter to the Land Tribunal if it finds sufficient force in the contention raised by the parties.

Case Title: Muhammed Hasheer Poolakkal v. United Arab Bank & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 181

The High Court has held that the courts in India cannot entertain any request directly from any private parties or institutions to initiate proceedings for attachment of properties in foreign states and added that such requests can only be made by the Centre or appropriate authorities under Section 105 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Upon examining the legislative intent behind incorporating Chapter VIIA of CrPC, Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A took the stand that permitting any individual or establishment to file an application would amount to reading into the provision something which was never intended to be contemplated therein.

28. Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules| No Opportunity Of Hearing U/R 66(5) Before Registrar Accepts Report: HC Full Bench Upholds Precedent

Case Title: Reji K. Joshy & Ors. v. Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 182

The High Court has upheld the position established by its Division Bench in 2010 by agreeing that Rule 66 (5) of the does not contemplate any opportunity being given by the Registrar before accepting any report or initiating any action based on the report. A Full Bench of Justice P.B Suresh Kumar, Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan and Justice C.S. Sudha thereby upheld the law as found in State of Kerala v. Aravindakshan Nair [2010 (3) KLT 11] while adjudicating upon a reference made by the Division Bench doubting the correctness of the proposition of law laid down in the impugned decision.

29. DYFI Muslim Leader Marries Christian Woman, Ignites Political Row: Kerala HC Disposes Habeas Moved By Her Father Alleging Love Jihad

Case Title: Joseph v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 183

The High Court disposed of a habeas corpus plea moved by the father of a Christian woman Jyotsna Mary Joseph, who married a Muslim DYFI region secretary Shejin. The father had claimed that his daughter was taken away against her will and was kept in illegal detention while raising 'love jihad' allegations in the matter. A Division Bench of Justice V.G. Arun and Justice C.S Sudha decided to dispose of the petition after hearing the woman who confirmed that she was not illegally detained and that she had taken the decision voluntarily.

30. Kerala High Court Dismisses Dileep's Plea To Quash FIR In Murder Conspiracy Case

Case Title: P. Gopalakrishnan @ Dileep & Ors v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 184

The Court dismissed the plea moved by Dileep to quash the FIR filed by the Crime Branch of Kerala Police against him and five others for conspiring to murder the investigation officials in the 2017 actor rape case, in which Dileep is facing trial as the chief conspirator. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A opined that even if what is revealed from the allegations is a doubtful case for making out the offences at the stage of FIR, the benefit of the doubt should go in favour of the investigation and not to the accused because interference in the investigation at this stage would foreclose all opportunities for the police to collect materials in support of the allegations.

Also Read: Allegations Against Dileep Prima Facie Suggest Intention To Harm Police Officers : Kerala High Court

31. Kerala High Court Passes Ex-Parte Interim Order Against ReporterTV On Reports Against Dileep's Brother-In-Law

Case Title: T.N. Suraj v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 185

The Court issued an interim ex-parte gag order against Reporter TV restricting it from publishing, broadcasting or telecasting any item concerning or relating to actor Dileep's brother in law, Suraj while reporting about the murder conspiracy case or the 2017 actor sexual assault case for the next three weeks. Suraj had moved the Court alleging that the respondent channel was subjecting him to a media trial and resorting to sensationalism and publication of fabricated allegations against the accused and their associates in the said cases. In his plea, he had sought an injunction to restrain the media from reporting court proceedings.

32. Media Can't Make Suggestions Of Guilt Or Innocence Of A Person Or Credibility Of Witnesses: Kerala High Court

Case Title: T.N. Suraj v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 186

While temporarily gagging Reporter TV from publishing/broadcasting/telecasting any item concerning or relating to actor Dileep's brother in law, Suraj on the murder conspiracy case or the 2017 actor sexual assault case, the Court commented on the detrimental effect media trial has on the legal system. Justice Mohammed Nias C.P remarked that media trials influence public opinion and that they could often lead to loss of faith in the justice delivery system.

33. Res Judicata Not Applicable To Subsequent Arbitral Proceedings If First Award Was Set Aside Due To Incompetence Of Tribunal: Kerala High Court

Case Title: M/s Bativala and Karani v. K.I. Johny & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 187

The Court has held that there is no legal impediment for arbitrating parties to initiate fresh proceedings if the district court sets aside an award on any issue not yet concluded in that award. This implies that the principles of res judicata will have only a limited application in such proceedings under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. A Division Bench of Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S Sudha observed that even if the earlier award was one set aside not on any ground affecting the competency of the Tribunal, the subsequent arbitral proceedings are not hit by the principles of res judicata.

34. Kerala High Court Permits Couple To Proceed With Non-Commercial Surrogacy

Case Title: Deepa Srinivasan & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 188

The Court came to the rescue of a couple who had approached the Court with a plea seeking permission to a private hospital to facilitate non-commercial and altruistic surrogacy for them. Upon noticing that all necessary precautions were taken by all the concerned parties, Justice N. Nagaresh permitted the couple to proceed with surrogacy while clarifying that further directions are to be given in the case, pending the writ petition. Therefore, the matter will be taken up again on 23 May.

35. Kerala High Court Asks Travancore Devaswom Board To Take Over Sabarimala Virtual Queue Services

Case Title: Suo Motu v. Travancore Devaswom Board

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 189

The High Court ruled that the control over the virtual queue system for Sabarimala darshan should be transferred from the Kerala Police to the Travancore Devaswom Board. A Division Bench comprising Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice P.G Ajithkumar delivered its verdict in a suo motu case and two petitioners, including one Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the legality of the Pilgrim Management System, implemented by the Kerala Police.

36. Substandard Pooja Items Sold In Temple Premises: Kerala High Court Says Temple Advisory Committee Bound To Keep Constant Vigil

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

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 190

The Court held that the Temple Advisory Committee constituted under Section 31A of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act is bound to keep constant vigil over the sale of vazhipadu (pooja items) in the stalls on the temple premises, to ensure that the Kuthaka holder (successful bidder) is not selling any substandard pooja items to devotees. A Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice P.G Ajithkumar held that a ritual or pooja in the temple has to be performed by using pure pooja items while disposing of a suo motu matter initiated based on a news item that reported serious irregularities in the sale of Vazhipadu items in Vaikom Sree Mahadeva Temple, particularly in the sale of 'Koovalamala'.

37. Illegal Appointment Will Not Get Legitimised By Efflux Of Time: Kerala High Court Annuls Appointment Of Kochi Metro General Manager

Case Title: Suresh George v. Kochi Metro Rail Ltd & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 191

The High Court has annulled the appointment of Nireesh C, the General Manager of Kochi Metro Rail Limited (KMRL), (marketing, alternative revenue and corporate communications) upon finding that he fell short of the minimum age limit fixed for the post when he was appointed. Justice V.G. Arun annulled the appointment holding that an illegal appointment will not get legitimised by the passage of time and that the Court cannot evade its duty merely because there was a delay in pointing out the illegality.

Case Title: Asha Joseph v. Babu C. George & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 192

The Court has held in a suit for specific performance under the Code of Civil Procedure, even if the plaintiff has not given details of funds in her possession or the manner in which she intended to raise them in the plaint, this is not fatal to the suit since those aspects are matters of evidence which need not be pleaded. While allowing an appeal, Justice P. B. Suresh Kumar and Justice C. S. Sudha observed that although the appellant who was the plaintiff in the suit had not given the details of the funds in her possession or the manner in which she intended to raise them in the plaint, the suit will survive since those aspects are matters of evidence, which as per Order VI Rule 1 of CPC need not be pleaded.

39. Bonafide Error In Format Of Date On E-Way Bill, Warrants Only Minor Penalty: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Greenlights Power Solutions Versus State Tax Officer

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 193

The bench of Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas has held that a minor penalty can be imposed for a bona fide mistake in the date on an e-way bill. The petitioner/assessee has a valid GST registration and carries on business in electrical contract work. In connection with the work of a hospital in Assam, some goods were transported by a vehicle after paying the required tax. During the course of transportation from Ernakulam, the goods were intercepted by the department, who detained the goods under section 129 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 on noticing an irregularity in the e-way bill.

40. Persons From Whom Amounts Were Collected Based On An Unconstitutional Levy Entitled To Refund: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Jaganadhan v. State of Kerala & connected matters.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 194

The Court has ruled that persons from whom a fee was collected under a State Circular calling for applications for use of unnotified land for other purposes were entitled to a refund of the amount since the circular was struck down as unconstitutional. Justice T.R. Ravi observed that the issue of whether the claim for refund of amounts which have been collected based on the unconstitutional levy either in the form of fee or in the form of tax or in the form of duty is no longer res integra.

41. Land Used For Cultivating Long Duration Crops Not Ecologically Fragile Even If Encircled By Vested Forests: Kerala High Court

Case Title: S. Raveendranath Pai & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 195

In a significant judgement, the Court has held that the land principally used for the cultivation of crops of long duration cannot be declared as ecologically fragile land under the Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Act even if it is encircled by vested forests. Upon perusal of Sections 2(b) and 2(c) of the Act, a Division Bench of Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S. Sudha concluded that land which is not a forest does not become an ecologically fragile land.

42. Can Invoke ESMA If Ongoing KSEB Strike Causes Disruption To Its Operations: Kerala High Court Issues Interim Order

Case Title: Arun Jose v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 196

In a major setback to the ongoing strike organised by the KSEB Officers' Association, the Kerala High Court on Tuesday issued an interim order in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking to declare the ongoing strike by the Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB) officers as illegal. Justice C.S Dias and Justice Basant Balaji opined that the State Government has an obligation to act as a conciliator between the KSEB, which is a State Public Sector Undertaking, and its employees to settle their differences amicably, without causing any disruption to the normal lives of citizens.

43. Article 226 | Rule Of Alternative Remedy Is A Rule Of Discretion, Not Rule Of Jurisdiction: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Chengalam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Rajkumar & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 197

The High Court has held that merely because it may not exercise its discretion under Article 226 of the Constitution in view of the availability of alternative remedy, is not a ground to hold that it has no jurisdiction. A Division Bench of Justice Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S. Sudha said that the case appears to be a classic example of the 'fence eating the crop' while adding that the exercise of the jurisdiction is discretionary; it is not exercised merely because it is lawful to do so.

44. State Govt Bound To Consider Requests For "Bharat Series" Registration Of Vehicles: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Satyendra Kumar Jha v. Secretary (Transport) & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 198

The High Court has ruled that the State government is bound to consider the application of the petitioner for registration of his vehicle with a 'Bharat series' number since the Centre had already brought it into implementation. Justice Sathish Ninan also clarified that the fact that the State was yet to finalise the tax payable for such registration was immaterial to consider such applications. "The manner and form of registration in BH series having already been brought in by the Central Government, the State Government is bound to consider the request of the petitioners for registration of the vehicles in BH series," said the Court.

45. Decriminalisation Of Attempt To Commit Suicide Is The General View Of Courts: Kerala High Court Drops Charges U/S 309 IPC

Case Title: Simi C.N. v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 199

The High Court recently quashed all charges pending against a Village Officer who attempted to commit suicide and was booked under Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code (attempt to commit suicide). After an elaborate study of the general judicial opinion on the issue, Justice K. Haripal observed that the growing trend was in favour of decriminalisation of the offence since suicidal behaviour is often considered to be a symptom of mental distress.

46. Magistrate Can Decide Validity Of Talaq In Wife's Petition Under DV Act If Husband Disputes Their Marital Status: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Shameena Siddique & Anr. v. M. Abubekhar Siddiq & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 200

The High Court has ruled that a Magistrate is empowered to decide the pela of talaq raised by the husband in his wife's petition filed under the Domestic Violence Act if he disputes their marital status on that ground. Justice Kauser Edappagath thereby allowed a criminal revision petition holding that the finding of the appellate court that the Magistrate has no power to decide the validity of the talaq is wrong and only to be set aside.

48. [Actor Assault Case] Kerala High Court Dismisses Witness' Plea Alleging Harassment From Investigating Officer

Case Title: Sagar Vincent v. Biju Paulose & Ors.

The Court dismissed a petition filed by Sagar Vincent, a witness in the 2017 actor sexual assault case alleging that investigating officer in the case Biju Paulose was threatening him. While observing that the relief sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted, Justice Anu Sivaraman clarified that the petitioner shall be summoned only after giving due notice under Section 160 CrPC and that he will not be harassed further or summoned unnecessarily, except for the purpose of recording the statement.

49. Nun Rape Case: Kerala High Court Admits Appeal Challenging Bishop Franco Mulakkal's Acquittal

Case Title: State of Kerala v. Bishop Franco Mulakkal

The Court admitted the appeal filed against the decision of the Additional District and Sessions Court acquitting Bishop Franco Mulakkal of the Catholic Church in the nun rape case. A Division Bench of Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice C. Jayachandran also issued notice to Mulakkal.

50. Actor Sexual Assault Case: Kerala High Court Grants Bail To Co-Accused Vijeesh, Incarcerated For 5 Yrs

Case Title: Vijeesh V.P. v. State of Kerala

The Court granted bail to the 4th accused in the sensational actor sexual assault case of 2017 where a popular Malayalam actress was abducted, wrongfully confined and sexually assaulted in a moving car. Justice P. Gopinath released the applicant on bail considering that he had served five years in jail and since other accused who had similar roles in the incident as that of the applicant were already granted bail.

51. K Rail | Centre Claims It Did Not Sanction Ongoing SIA Conducted By State, Kerala High Court Reserves Judgment

Case Title: Muralikrishnan v. State of Kerala & connected matters

The Court reserved the judgment in the batch of petitions challenging the State authorities laying down survey stones on petitioners' property as part of the ongoing survey in furtherance of the K-Rail Silver Line project. Meanwhile, the Centre submitted a written instruction that the State had not approached the Railways seeking permission to proceed with the Social Impact Assessment (SIA) or to lay survey stones on private land for the project.

Also Read: K-Rail | Centre An Equal Partner In The Project, Equally Accountable As State: Kerala High Court

Also Read: K-Rail SilverLine| Laying Of Survey Stones For SIA, Not Acquisition; Won't Affect Land Owner's Rights: Kerala High Court

52. Twenty20 Worker's Murder: Kerala High Court Grants Bail To Four Accused

Case Title: Sainudheen & Ors v. State of Kerala & Anr.

The Court allowed the appeal moved by four CPM leaders accused in the murder of Twenty20 worker, C.K. Deepu, thereby granting them bail and setting them at liberty. Justice Kauser Edappagath released the accused citing that their further detention seemed unnecessary considering that they had no criminal antecedents and since they had not used any weapon.

53. Can A Weaker Sect Among Religious Minority Claim Further Protection Under Article 30? Kerala High Court To Consider CSI Bishop's Plea

Case Title: Most Rev. Dr. Darmaraj Rasalam & Anr v. Union of India & Ors

The Court admitted a petition filed by a Christian sect which raises the point of whether a weaker section within a religious minority can claim further protection under Article 30 to reserve seats for that sect in the educational institutions run by it. The writ petition was filed by the President of the South India Union of Churches (SIUC), Bishop Dr. Darmaraj Rasalam and the Medical Mission of the South Kerala Diocese of the Church of South India.

54. Plea Before Kerala High Court Challenges The Mandate Of Equivalency Certificate For Masters Obtained From Universities Outside State

Case Title: Ranimol K.J. & Ors v. State of Kerala & Ors.

A petition has reached the Court challenging the condition under the Kerala Education Rules, 1959 mandating an Equivalency certificate for master's degrees obtained from universities outside Kerala arguing that its violative of principles of equality. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas admitted the plea recently and the respondents sought time to file a counter in the matter

Also Read: Kerala High Court Bids Farewell To Justices Sunil Thomas & K. Haripal

55. Oil Prices Rising Internationally Due To Ukraine Situation; Gradual Passing Of Prices To Consumers Not Arbitrary : Companies To Kerala High Court

Case Title: Kerala State Road Transport Corporation v. Union of India & Ors.

The state-owned oil marketing companies told the Court on Friday that oil prices are increasing due to the Ukraine war and that the companies are gradually passing on the prices to the consumers, which cannot be termed arbitrary. The submission was made in response to a p[lea by the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) challenging the decision of State-owned Oil Marketing Companies to increase the price of diesel sold to the Corporation, which is allegedly much higher than the market price.

56. Kerala High Court Asks Public Service Commission To Provide Visually Impaired Woman With A Suitable Scribe To Appear For Online Exam

Case Title: Anjitha C.P v. Kerala Public Service Commission & Anr.

The Court has directed its Public Service Commission to ensure that a visually impaired woman is given a suitable scribe as contemplated in the circular issued by the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment Department of Disability Affairs to appear in an online examination for the post of a teacher. However, Justice N. Nagaresh clarified that if the respondents are not able to provide a suitable scribe, the petitioner shall be permitted to indicate her own scribe and added that the respondents to ensure that the scribe deputed by them is interacting with the petitioner sufficiently early, so as to ascertain suitability.

57. Actor Assault Case | Prosecution Submits Audio Clips Before Kerala High Court, Seeks More Time To Wind Up Further Probe

The prosecution has submitted a pendrive before the Kerala High Court while seeking more time to conclude the further investigation in the 2017 sexual assault case. The pendrive includes two folders containing three voice clips each which were apparently collected by the investigating officers during the course of further investigation.

58. 19 Year Old Allegedly Dies Post Covishield Vaccination: Kerala High Court Seeks Centre's Response On Parents' Plea

Case Title: Jean George & Anr v. Serum Institute Of India & Ors.

The parents of a 19-year-old student have moved the High Court seeking justice alleging that their daughter died due to the compulsory administration of the Covishield vaccine and they have sought Rs 1 crore as compensation for the death of their only daughter. Justice N Nagaresh has sought the view of the central government on the petition.

59. [Bulk Diesel Prices] Maintainability Issue Not Considered: Oil Companies Argue Before Kerala HC In Appeals Against Interim Order In Favour Of KSRTC

Case Title: Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

The Court heard the State-owned oil marketing companies in the appeals challenging the interim order issued in favour of Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) wherein the OMCs have been directed to levy the price of High Speed Diesel (HSD) at par with the price available at retail pumps temporarily. A vacation bench of Justice V.G. Arun and Justice C.S Sudha will continue hearing the appeals on Tuesday after recording KSRTC's submission that a contempt petition will not be filed during court vacation.

Also Read: Oil Companies Move Appeals Assailing Interim Order In Favour Of KSRTC

60. Actor Assault Case| Kerala High Grants One More Month For Prosecution To Wind Up Further Investigation

Case Title: P. Gopalakrishnan alias Dileep v. State of Kerala & Anr.

The Court granted one more month's time to the prosecution to conclude the further investigation in the 2017 sexual assault case. Justice Kauser Edappagath granted this extension after noting that the pendrive submitted by the prosecution earlier this month contained two folders containing three voice clips each which were apparently collected by the investigating officers during the course of further investigation and which required careful analysis.

61. In A Rare Move, Kerala High Court Examines Witness At Appeal Stage Allowing NIA's Plea

Case Title: M.H. Faisal v. State of Kerala

In an extraordinary step, the Court allowed witness examination before the Court at the appellate stage. The development happened in the Kashmir terror recruitment case. Generally, witness examinations in criminal appeals are completed at the trial courts and the High Courts only evaluate the evidence gathered by the trial court. While considering appeals filed by the convicted accused and the National Investigation Agency (NIA) against an NIA court decision, the Division Bench of Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice C Jayachandran allowed the examination of a BSNL official who had issued a call record showing communication between the accused and some persons in Kashmir.

62. Kerala High Court Asks District Judge To Inspect & Submit Report On Trivandrum Mental Health Centre After Reports Claim Inhuman Conditions

Case Title: High Court Legal Aid Committee v. State of Kerala

The Court took notice of the concerns raised regarding the alleged alarming and inhuman condition of the patients in the Thiruvananthapuram Mental Health Centre. Justice Sathish Ninan has sought a report from the Thiruvananthapuram District Judge, who is also the Chairman of the Monitoring Committee of the Mental Health Centre in the district on the functioning of the said Centre.

66. Kerala High Court Notifies Guidelines For Recording Evidence Of Vulnerable Witnesses As Per Supreme Court's Direction

The High Court has issued certain Guidelines for Recording of Evidence of Vulnerable Witnesses in light of the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Smruti Tukaram Badade v. State Of Maharashtra & Anr. In an attempt to provide vulnerable witnesses with a safe and conducive environment to testify fearlessly during a criminal trial, the Court has directed setting up Vulnerable Witnesses Deposition Centres at all courts in the state.

67. 'Police Leaking Privileged Communication Between Advocate & Clients' : Lawyer's Complaint Before Bar Council

A lawyer has filed a complaint before the Bar Council of Kerala seeking appropriate legal action against the police officers who allegedly leaked privileged communication between lawyers and their clients in the cases involving actor Dileep. This is in light of the reports that suggest that calls between Senior Advocate B. Raman Pillai who represents the actor in most cases and Dileep's brother Anoop were leaked to the media.

68. Kerala High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To Makeup Artist Accused Of Sexual Assualt By Several Women

Case Title: Anez Anzare & Anr v. State of Kerala & Ors.

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to celebrity makeup artist Anez Anzare who has been accused of sexually abusing several women under the guise of applying makeup on them. Justice Gopinath P. held that the petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail in all the cases registered against him subject to conditions.

69. Actor Assault Case | Kerala Bar Council Pulls Up Crime Branch For Leaking Privileged Communication To Media

The Bar Council of Kerala lashed out at the Crime Branch for leaking privileged communication between a lawyer and his client in the 2017 sexual assault case to the media. A meeting was convened to consider the complaint filed before the Council seeking appropriate legal action against the police officers who allegedly leaked a telephone conversation between Senior Advocate B. Raman Pillai and actor Dileep who is accused in the assault case.

Also Read: Lawyer Moves Kerala Court Against Alleged Leak Of Privileged Communication To Media By Police

70. [Bulk Diesel Prices] Kerala High Court Reserves Order In Appeals Challenging Interim Order In Favour Of KSRTC

Case Title: Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

The Court has reserved its order on the appeals moved by state-owned oil marketing companies (OMC) challenging the interim order issued in favour of Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) wherein the OMCs have been directed to levy the price of High Speed Diesel (HSD) at par with the price available at retail pumps temporarily. A vacation bench of Justice C.S Dias and Justice Basant Balaji announced that it will declare its verdict in the case on Monday.

71. Pampa Sand Mining Case: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Vigilance Probe

Case Title: State of Kerala v. Ramesh Chennithala & Ors.

The Court has set aside the vigilance probe which was ordered into the alleged illegal mining of sand accumulated along the banks of river Pampa. In August 2020, the Vigilance Special Court in Thiruvananthapuram had ordered a Vigilance inquiry into the charges of corruption based on a petition filed by Senior Congress Leader Ramesh Chennithala. Justice Sunil Thomas set aside the vigilance court's order on a review petition filed by the State.

72. Kerala High Court To Hold Special Sittings During Summer Vacation To Reduce Pendency Of Criminal Appeals

With an objective to reduce the pendency in Criminal Appeals, the Court will be holding special sittings during its ongoing summer vacation to hear jail appeals and legal aid matters. This was disclosed through a notification published on the High Court website, which also said that this step was taken after Chief Justice S Manikumar ordered special sittings to be held.

73. Can GST Be Imposed On Royalty Paid To Govt? Kerala High Court To Consider

Case Title: Royal Sand & Gravels Pvt Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors.

The High Court has admitted a plea that has raised significant questions of whether royalty paid to the government qualifies as tax and if GST can be imposed on such royalty. The petitioner has pointed out the settled legal position on the concept of royalty by the Supreme Court where it has been held that royalty is tax. Therefore, according to the petitioner, the royalty payable on the extraction of minerals being in the nature of statutory impost comes under the preview of taxation.

74. Actor-Producer Vijay Babu Moves Kerala High Court Seeking Pre-Arrest Bail In Rape Case

Case Title: Vijay Babu v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Malayalam actor-producer Vijay Babu has approached the High Court seeking anticipatory bail after an actress accused him of sexually exploiting her. According to him, the defacto complainant is merely trying to blackmail him by filing this false case. He added that while the survivor may be free to raise allegations against anyone, the statutory authorities are duty-bound to ascertain the truthfulness of the allegation before tarnishing or defaming an individual based on a complaint which could not be substantied.

75. Idukki Airstrip A Threat To Periyar Tiger Reserve, No Clearance From Environment Ministry: Centre Tells Kerala High Court

Case Title: M.N. Jayachandran v. Union of India

The Central Government objected to the airstrip being constructed in Idukki and submitted before the Court that the project has not secured the required prior permission from the Ministry of Environment and Forest. A Division Bench of Justice C.S. Dias and Justice C. Jayachandran was adjudicating upon a PIL seeking a direction upon the State authorities not to proceed with the construction of the airstrip and the operation of the aircraft in 4.8565 hectares in Idukki District without obtaining clearance under Section 2 of the Forest Conservation Act and Environmental clearance and other allied reliefs.