Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: February 6 To February 12, 2023

Nominal Index [Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 63-73]Sudheesh Babu v. State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 63Kerala Public Service Commission v. The State Commissionerate for Persons with Disabilities & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 64 Kerala State Insurance Department v. Joy Wilson M.V. & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 65 Shabna Abdulla v. Union of India & Others 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 66 George M. Mathews @ George V. Muhammed Haneefa Rawther 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 67 Mrs. Sasikala Menon V. State of Kerala and Another 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 68 M/S Peniel Cashew Company V M/S.Ahcom Sarl 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 69 B v. H 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 70 Tomy Joseph v. The Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies (General), Idukki & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 71 M.M. Abdul Azeez & Ors. v. State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 72 Vijay Kirgandur & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 73 Judgments/Orders This WeekAttempt To Murder Charge Cannot Be Quashed Merely On Settlement Between Parties If Prima Facie Possibility Of Conviction Is Strong: Kerala High CourtCase Title: Sudheesh Babu v. State of Kerala Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 63 The Kerala High Court refused to quash an FIR against a man accused of attempt to murder under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 despite the dispute being settled between the accused and the de facto complainant. Justice A. Badharudeen was hearing two petitions filed by a man accused of offences under Sections 324 and 307 of the IPC and under Sections 3(1) (s), 3(2) (va) of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2015. The first petition was for quashing the FIR filed against him and the second petition was to quash the order of the Special Court that refused to release the car involved in the above crime. The court observed that if on prima facie analysis by the court the chances of conviction under Section 307 are strong, it can refuse to quash the FIR despite settlement between parties. However, if the chances of conviction are low, the court may permit the quashing of the FIR as it could result in harmony between the parties.State Commissioner For Persons With Disabilities Can Only 'Recommend' KPSC To Provide Exam Centres Near Residence Of Disabled Candidates: Kerala HCCase Title: Kerala Public Service Commission v. The State Commissionerate for Persons with Disabilities & Anr. Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 64 The Kerala High Court held that the order issued by the State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities to the Kerala Public Service Commission (KPSC) directing it to provide candidates with disabilities, who are participating in its selection process, with examination centres near their residences, was beyond the scope of its powers. The Single Judge Bench of Justice Shaji P. Chaly perused Sections 80-82 of the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 which lays down the powers and functions of the State Commissioner to hold that the impugned order thus passed by the Commissioner was without any jurisdiction. The court observed: "The Commissioner, in my view, is not a civil court, even though powers are conferred on the Commissioner to exercise the powers conferred on the civil court for summoning and enforcing the attendance of witnesses etc., and for other consequential aspects, in accordance with Section 82 of the Act, 2016. In that view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that Ext.P1 order suffers from vice of arbitrariness and illegality, liable to be interfered with under Article 226 of the Constitution of India"Pedestrian Crossings Must Be Marked & Enforced On All Main Roads: Kerala High Court Orders State Govt, NHAI To Take Necessary ActionCase Title: Kerala State Insurance Department v. Joy Wilson M.V. & Ors. Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 65 Slamming State Insurance Department for its argument that a person crossing the road using 'zebra crossing' is required to be extra careful, the Kerala High Court held that unless it is specifically pleaded and proved that there was a clear case of negligence on part of pedestrian, such an inference cannot be made. The department had challenged Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal's award of Rs.48,32,140 in favour of the kin of a 50 year-old woman who was hit by a police vehicle when she was crossing the roading using the 'Zebra Crossing'. Doreena Rola Mendenza, the victim, was headmistress of St.Joseph L.P. School, and died as a result of the accident. The Court ordered that the pedestrian crossings must be marked and enforced on all main roads, and called it a "forensic duty" of the authorities. Terming the case as an 'eye opener' for everyone, Justice Devan observed: "Our roads are still woefully inadequate in pedestrian safety. There are seldom pedestrian crossings properly marked; and even when they are, very few drivers heed it. This Court is fully aware if the Rules relating to ‘Zebra Crossing’ are taught to the learner drivers; but it is evident that they are never enforced. This...

Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: February 6 To February 12, 2023

Sheryl Sebastian

Tags