Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: January 2 To January 8, 2023

Nominal Index [Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 1-11]XXXX v. Union Of India and Connected Cases 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 1Sali M.N. v. State of Kerala & Ors. and other connected matters 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 2T. A. Abdul Sathar v. The State of Kerala and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw(Ker) 3Lt. Col. E.V. Krishnan & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 4Laila Bhagaval Singh v. State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw(Ker) 5Jayadevi v. Narayana Pilla & Ors.2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 6Sadanandan K.S. & Ors. v. Kerala Toddy Workers Welfare Fund Board & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 7Rajesh and Anr. v. The Station House Officer and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 8Chandra Chooden Nair S v. State of Kerala and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw(Ker) 9 Pappu Bawariya and Anr. v. District Collector Civil Station and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw(Ker)10Siraj v. State of Kerala and Abhilash v. State of Kerala and Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 11Judgements/Orders This WeekAssisted Reproductive Technology Act | Enforcing Upper Age Limit On Couples Who Were In The Middle Of Treatment Is Arbitrary : Kerala High CourtCase Title: XXXX v. Union Of India and Connected CasesCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 1The Kerala High Court observed that the imposition of age restriction under the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulations) Act, 2021 without a transitional provision, is irrational and arbitrary. Thereby, the Court issued the direction that the petitioners who were undergoing ART services as of the date on which the ART Act came into effect (25.01.2022) shall be permitted to continue their treatment.The Court has also directed the National Assisted Reproductive Technology and Surrogacy Board to alert the Central Government about the need for a re-look at the upper age limit prescribed in Section 21(g) of the Act.The Court issued the aforesaid directions while disposing of a batch of Writ Petitions filed challenging the upper age limit of 50 years for women and 55 years for men prescribed under the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulations) Act, 2021 which prohibits the application of ART services to persons above the prescribed age limit.Persons Extracting Groundwater For Consumer Supply Are Bound To Obtain Statutory Registration: Kerala High Court Case Title: Sali M.N. v. State of Kerala & Ors. and other connected mattersCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 2The Kerala High Court has held that persons engaged in the business of extracting groundwater and supplying it to consumers through tanker lorries are 'users of ground water' as defined under Section 2(1)(h) of the Kerala Ground Water (Control and Regulation) Act, 2002 and are bound to obtain registration under Section 9 of the Act, irrespective of whether the areas where they operate are notified areas or not.The Single Judge Bench of Justice N. Nagaresh thus directed the petitioners to submit their applications for registration before the Ground Water Authority, and thereafter directed the latter to issue Certificate of Registration to the applicants subject to such conditions and restrictions as may be prescribed, after making requisite enquiries in this regard."The Entrepreneurs like the petitioners, it is to be kept in mind, are supplying drinking water to the areas/buildings where there are no sufficient availability of drinking water. An absolute prohibition of their activity would result in non-supply of potable water to the needy residents and citizen. Therefore, any regulation of the activity of water supply through tanker lorries will have to take note of the requirements of the citizens also, who may require potable water due to non-availability of potable water or due to non-supply or short supply by the Kerala Water Authority. A pragmatic view has to be taken while regulations are made, keeping in mind the purpose for which the Act, 2002 has been enacted", the Court added.Can't Test Veracity Of Material When Cognizable Offence Disclosed: Kerala High Court Dismisses Cop's Plea For Quashing Of Corruption CaseCase Title: T. A. Abdul Sathar v. The State of Kerala and Ors.Citation: 2023 LiveLaw(Ker) 3The Kerala High Court observed that a finding on the veracity of the material in a case where the allegations levelled by the prosecution disclose a cognizable offence, is not a consideration for the High Court while exercising its power under Section 482 CrPC to quash a criminal proceeding.Justice K. Babu observed that "it is trite that the power of quashing criminal proceedings should be exercised with circumspection and that too, in the rarest of rare cases and it was not justified for this Court in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the Final report or the complaint. A finding on the veracity of a material relied on by the prosecution in a case where the allegations levelled by the prosecution disclose a cognizable offence, is not a consideration for the High Court while exercising its power under Section 482 Cr.P.C."Inspector Can't Adjudicate, Quantify Wages Payable As...

Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: January 2 To January 8, 2023

Athira Prasad

Tags