Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: August 07 - August 13, 2023

Nominal Index [Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 377-397]

National Insurance Co Ltd v. Jareesh & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 377

Zulu Haris v. Union of India & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 378

Deepak K. Balakrishnan v State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 379

State of Kerala v. Navaneeth Krishnan and other connected matters 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 380

 Luciya Francis v State of Kerala  2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 381

XXX & Anr. v. The Health Secretary & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 382

Poongottil Prasad v Melattur Grama Panchayat 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 383

Santiago Martin & Anr v. Union of India & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 384

Rahib K.Y. & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 385

Vineesh v State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 386

Joseph John v State of Kerala & Connected matters 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 387

Sandhya v Secretary & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 388

Faizal K V v. State of Kerala & Anr 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 389

M/S Srinivasa Builders v. Commercial Tax Officer & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 390

Suo Moto v State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 391

Abdul Mujeeb v Suja 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 392

Shajan Scariya v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 393

Thressiamma Jose v State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 394

Vineet Ganesh v. Priyanka Vasan 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 395

Shaju v. State of Kerala 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 396

Lijeesh M.J. @ Lijeesh Mullezhath v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 397

Judgments/Orders This Week

MV Act | Insurance Company Can Recover Compensation From Insured If Clear Breach Of Policy Conditions Proved: Kerala High Court

Case Title: National Insurance Co Ltd v. Jareesh & Ors

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 377

The Kerala High Court recently upheld the right of insurance companies to recover compensation amounts from the insured (vehicle owner) if the driver involved in the motor accident did not have a valid driving license, as long as the insurance company proves its defence under Section 149(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

Justice C. Jayachandran emphasised that the insurer must establish a clear breach of policy conditions by the owner to be entitled to reimbursement and that the insured was guilty of negligence and failed to exercise reasonable care in ensuring that the driver had a valid driving license at the time of the accident.

"Insofar as the insurer's claim for reimbursement from the insured, all what is required is to establish a clear breach of a policy condition in terms of Section 149(2)(a)(ii). This Court will further clarify that, if the findings/stipulations in Clauses (iii), (iv) and (vi) are satisfied, the insurer will be entitled to seek complete exoneration of the liability, that is to say, even as against third party; else, the insurer will be duty bound to own the claim as against the third party, but in which case he will have the liberty to seek reimbursement from the insured upon establishing a clear violation of a condition of the policy."

Kerala High Court Directs Commissioner Of Entrance Exams To Consider Medical Aspirant's Request For KEAM Allotment

Case Title: Zulu Haris v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 378

The Kerala High Court recently directed the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations to consider the case of a student who had qualified the National Eligibility Cum Entrance Test (UG)-2023 (NEET), but whose name was not included in the final category list of KEAM-2023 on the ground that she did not upload her NEET (UG) Scorecard.

Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan directed the said authority to pass appropriate orders in the case within a period of one week.

No Consent For Sexual Act When Victim Was Semi Conscious: Kerala High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail To Accused Under SC/ST Act

Case Title: Deepak K. Balakrishnan v State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 379

The Kerala High Court refused anticipatory bail to a college student accused of committing rape upon her junior, after intoxicating her.

While the accused claimed they were in a consensual relationship, Justice A Badharudheen noted that prosecutrix, who is a member of a Scheduled Caste community, had alleged that accused forcefully fed her a cake and some water after which she felt her eye sight was diminishing and she reached a semi unconscious stage.

In this backdrop the bench held that a prima facie case under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereafter, the Act) is made out, barring anticipatory bail.

It therefore dismissed the accused person's appeal stating,

“In this case the specific case of the defacto complainant is that she was subjected to rape after giving her a cake and a bottle of water by the accused and later she felt that her eye sight was diminishing and when she was at a semi conscious stage. In such a case, it cannot be held that the overt act alleged by the defacto complainant is one arose out of consent. Therefore, the prosecution allegations are well made out prima facie and as such anticipatory bail cannot be granted in view of the specific bar under Section 18 and 18A of the SC/ST Act.”

State Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau Can Investigate Corruption Offences Against Central Govt Employees: Kerala High Court

Case Title: State of Kerala v. Navaneeth Krishnan and other connected matters

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 380

The Kerala High Court recently held that the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) has the authority to register the crime and investigate offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 that are allegedly committed by Central Government employees.

A Single Judge Bench of Justice Kauser Edappagath noted that there was no special provision in the Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter, 'PC Act') or the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (hereinafter, DSPE Act') excluding or preventing the State police or a Special Agency of the State from investigating cases relating to the corruption of the Central Government employees.

"None of the provisions of the P.C Act or DSPE Act authorizes CBI or Central Vigilance Commission or any other Central Government Agency alone to investigate in matters relating to the Central Government employees. In the absence of a specific provision in the DSPE Act or PC Act divesting the power of the regular police authorities to investigate into the offences under any other competent law, it cannot be said that the power of the State police or a Special Agency of the State to register a crime and investigate into the offence allegedly committed by the Central Government employees in their State is taken away. For these reasons, I hold that the VACB, being a specially constituted body to investigate into the bribery, corruption and misconduct mainly under the P.C. Act is always clothed with the authority to investigate offences involving corruption that take place within the State, whether it is committed by a Central Government employee or a State Government employee," the Court observed.

Preventive Detention Orders Under KAAPA Issued For Maintenance Of Public Order, Not As Punishment: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Luciya Francis v State of Kerala 

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 381

The Kerala High Court has reiterated that preventive detention orders under Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 (hereafter, KAAPA) are issued for maintenance of public order and not as a penal measure.

A division bench comprising Justice A Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Sophy Thomas held thus:

“The preventive detention law cannot be used as a punitive measure and as a substitute of criminal trial. What cannot be achieved through a trial cannot be achieved through preventive detention. It can be invoked only for maintenance of public order when activities of a person become threat or adverse to the society. The detaining authority failed to address the issue keeping the perspective of the objectives to be secured under the KAA(P)A. In such circumstances, we order that the detention order is illegal and the detenue is set at liberty. He shall be released forthwith.”

'Genital Reconstructive Surgery Without Consent Violates Child's Rights' : Kerala High Court Calls For Regulating Sex Selective Surgeries

Case Title: XXX & Anr. v. The Health Secretary & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 382

The Kerala High Court directed the Government to constitute a State Level Multidisciplinary Committee consisting of experts to examine requests for performing sex-selective surgeries on intersex children.

The Committee is to comprise of a Pediatrician/Pediatric Endocrinologist, Pediatric Surgeon and Child Psychiatrist/Child Psychologist.

The Single Judge Bench of Justice V.G. Arun also called upon the Government to issue an order for regulating sex selective surgeries on infants and children within three months. The Bench clarified that until such order has been issued, such surgeries shall be conducted only on the opinion of the State Level Multidisciplinary Committee that the same would be essential to save the life of the child.

'Gender' & 'Sex' Distinct Concepts; Right To Choose Gender Is Vested With The Individual : Kerala High Court

Case Title: XXX & Anr. v. The Health Secretary & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 382

The Kerala High Court embarked upon an elaborate medico-legal discussion on the two concepts of 'gender' and 'sex', in an interesting decision raising the question as to whether the parents of a child with ambiguous genitalia would have the right to decide the gender of the child without the latter's consent and ignorant of the child's orientation.

The Single Judge Bench of Justice V.G. Arun observed that while the terms 'gender' and 'sex' were often used interchangeably in casual conversation, they were, in actuality, two distinct concepts.

"Sex refers to the biological characteristics of a person, particularly in relation to their reproductive anatomy and chromosomal composition. Gender, on the other hand, is a social and cultural construct that encompasses the roles, behaviours, expectations and identities associated with being male-female or non-binary," the Court observed.

Panchayat Vicariously Liable For Acts Of Upper Division Clerk Done In Course Of Employment: Kerala High Court

Case title: Poongottil Prasad v Melattur Grama Panchayat

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 383

The Kerala High Court recently observed that the Panchayat can be held vicariously liable for the acts of the Upper Division Clerk (UDC) committed during the course of the employment.

Holding the panchayat vicariously liable for the security deposit collected by the UDC, Justice N. Nagaresh observed thus:

“In view of the law on Vicarious Liability as discussed above, if any UDC employed by the respondent-Panchayat accepts money and issue the receipts in the course of his employment, the respondents are liable to refund that amount, if the amount accepted is refundable. The fact that a vigilance case is pending and action has been taken against the fraudulent activities of the UDC cannot be an excuse to deny the amounts duly deposited by the petitioner on the basis of the receipts issued on behalf of the Panchayat. The Panchayat is vicariously liable.”

Can't Bypass Remedies Under PMLA Unless Entirely Ill-Suited: Kerala High Court Dismisses Santiago Martin's Plea Against ED Attachments

Case Title: Santiago Martin & Anr v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 384

The Kerala High Court dismissed 'lottery king' Santiago Martin's petition challenging ED's attachment orders freezing his and his company's movable assets under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA).

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas held that PMLA provides a comprehensive three-tier remedy for such grievances and that the petitioners ought to have exhausted their alternative remedies rather than bypassing them, unless they are unsuitable for the situation.

"a three-tier remedy is provided under the PMLA itself, as fora to alleviate the grievances of those aggrieved. When such a scheme is provided for under the PMLA, petitioners do have an efficacious alternative remedy. These remedies, available under the statute, cannot be circumvented unless they are entirely ill-suited to meet the demands of the situation. Considering the timelines provided and the nature of authorities created under the PMLA, the alternative remedies cannot be regarded as ill-suited to meet the exigency. Any prejudice caused on account of the provisional attachment order can be remedied through the scheme of the Statute itself."

High Level Competency Expected From Public Prosecutors, 3 Yrs Practice Experience For Assistant Prosecutor Appointment Not Arbitrary: Kerala HC

Case Title: Rahib K.Y. & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 385

The Kerala High Court has held that government's decision to stipulate three years practice in criminal courts as an essential condition for appointment as Assistant Public Prosecutors cannot be said to be arbitrary.

Justice N. Nagaresh dismissed a plea challenging a notification issued by the Kerala Public Service Commission ('Kerala PSC') in this regard. The bench observed that Assistant Public Prosecutors are expected to prosecute criminal cases and aid the delivery of criminal justice in the State, and that in any case, it is for the appointing authority to decide and fix qualifications of candidates for appointment.

"Public Prosecutors and Assistant Public Prosecutors serve as State’s representatives tasked with upholding the interest of the State and of the general public. They have to carry out prosecutions on behalf of the State effectively. They have a duty to ensure that false accusations against any accused do not result in unfair punishment. It is their prime duty to ensure that justice is served. They have to help the Court to identify relevant facts. They are Officers of the Court who assist in the administration of justice. They must be unbiased, just and truthful. A high level of competency is expected from Public Prosecutors and Assistant Public Prosecutors. The Government therefore will be justified in insisting that they should have a minimum Court experience in conducting cases," the Court observed.

Wooden Stick Can Be Considered As 'Weapon' Under Section 326 IPC: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Vineesh v State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 386

The Kerala High Court recently decided whether ‘wooden stick’ can be considered as a ‘weapon’ to attract Section 326 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous means or weapons) of the IPC.

Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. held that the expression “any instrument which is used as a weapon” in the provision gives a broader scope to Section 326. Here, the Court noted that ‘wooden stick’ may not be considered as a weapon in its original form, but it can be considered as an instrument of weapon if it was used to cause grievous hurt. The Court held thus:

"The expression “any instrument which is used as a weapon”, gives a significantly broader scope to the said provision, capable of taking within it, any instrument which does not have the characteristics of a weapon under normal circumstances, provided the same was used as a weapon to cause grievous hut. Thus, the emphasis is on any “instrument which used as a weapon” and it is not necessary that the instrument as such should be a weapon in its original form.”

Students Can't Be Discriminated From Other Passengers While Boarding Bus, Merely For Availing Student Concession Rates: Kerala High Court

Case title: Joseph John v State of Kerala & Connected matters

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 387

The Kerala High Court directed the State Police Chief to issue directions to ensure that law and order problems are not created between students and bus owners/employees, regarding student concession rates.

The Court held that students cannot be discriminated from other passengers while boarding the bus, merely for availing student concession rates.

Justice P.V.Kunhikrishnan noted thus:

“But as long as the student concessions are in force, the owners and the employees of a bus cannot take a discriminative stand against the students while boarding buses, only because they are paying the concession rate. Students and other passengers are on an equal footing. It is the duty of the police to see that there is no law and order problem in connection with the same. The State police chief will issue necessary directions to all its subordinates to avert all such law and order problems because of this rift between the students and the employees of the buses.”

Parole May Be Refused Even To An Eligible Prisoner For Cogent Reasons: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Sandhya v Secretary & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 388

In an important ruling, the Kerala High Court held that prisoners do not have an inherent right to claim parole or leave and that the right to seek temporary release is contingent on meeting the statutory conditions under the Prisons Act and Rules and the discretion to grant or deny such release lies with the competent authority.

A Division Bench of Justice Alexander Thomas and Justice C. Jayachandran added that even in a case where a convicted prisoner satisfies the eligibility conditions, the authority is entitled to refuse leave for cogent reasons, clarifying that Rule 397 does not provide an absolute entitlement for leave and that such an interpretation would be incomprehensible as it would prioritise the Rules over the Act.

"For example, if there exists a real threat of a potential breach of peace and tranquility in the locality, or to the safety and security of the prisoner himself as envisaged in subrule (h) to Rule 397, the authority can refuse leave. The same is the case for a convicted prisoner with a high proclivity or propensity to commit crimes. An interpretation otherwise, construing Rule 397 as an absolute entitlement for leave, would amount to the Rules assuming paramountcy over the Act, which is incomprehensible."

Convicts Can't Invoke Section 389 CrPC To Seek Interim Suspension Of Sentence For Short Term Release: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Sandhya v Secretary & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 388

The Kerala High Court recently held that Section 389 of the CrPC does not contemplate an interim suspension of sentence and release of the prisoner for short-term requirements such as disease or marriage, while clarifying that such release should be sought under the Prisons Act and Rules through the process of leave or parole.

A Division Bench of Justice Alexander Thomas and Justice C. Jayachandran added that the provision is meant for suspending the execution of the sentence during the pendency of an appeal on its merits.

"Enabling release under Section 389 for short-term requirements is neither statutory, nor conducive, besides being subversive and in disregard of the special provisions of the Prisons Act and Rules."

S.5 Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act | Magistrate Can Order Accused To Give Handwriting Sample Even In Absence Of Arrest: Kerala HC

Case Title: Faizal K V v. State of Kerala & Anr

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 389

The Kerala High Court recently held that until specific provisions are enacted in CrPC, Magistrates are empowered to order the collection of handwriting samples of accused for investigation purposes and that such orders do not inherently violate Article 20(3) of the Constitution (right against self-incrimination).

Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan added that Magistrates have the jurisdiction to pass orders for the collection of measurements and specimen handwriting under Section 5 of the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act, 2022, even in the absence of the accused's formal arrest, which was further supported by the incorporation of Section 311A into CrPC.

"If a Magistrate believes it is necessary for any investigation or legal proceeding under the Code of Criminal Procedure or any other law, the Magistrate can issue an order directing a person to provide measurements under this Act. The person must comply with the order and allow the measurements to be taken according to the specified directions."

"When an accused person is called upon by the court or any other authority holding an investigation to give a specimen of his handwriting, he is not giving any testimony of the nature of a ‘personal testimony’. The giving of finger impressions or of specimen writing or of signatures by an accused person, though it may amount to furnishing evidence in the larger sense, is not included within the expression ‘to be a witness giving ...specimen writings by way of identification are not included in the expression ‘to be a witness’. It would be pertinent to note that the above observations were made prior to the incorporation of Section 311A and Section 5 of the Act 2022 in the Statute Book."

KVAT Act | Electricity Excluded From 'Goods'; Assessment Order Invalid Unless Compliant With Section 25(1): Kerala High Court

Case Title: M/S Srinivasa Builders v. Commercial Tax Officer & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 390

The Kerala High Court recently reiterated that electricity is excluded from the definition of 'goods' as per the Kerala Value Added Tax Act (KVAT Act) and even if electricity were deemed taxable based on its inclusion in the 1st Schedule, an assessment order would not be sustainable unless all the conditions under Section 25(1) [Assessment of escaped turnover] were fulfilled.

Justice Anu Sivaraman added that in such circumstances, the charge against the petitioner would be limited to an inaccurate return filing rather than concealing taxable turnover or tax evasion.

"Even if the contention of the revenue that electrical energy is included in the 1st Schedule is accepted, there would be no element of escaped assessment since the inclusion of electricity is in the 1st Schedule and no tax is payable. Therefore, the charge against the petitioner could, at best, be one of filing of an incorrect return and not of suppression of taxable turnover or attempt to evade tax. In the above circumstances, the essential ingredient under Section 25(1) would not be available to sustain an order of assessment on best judgment"

Mandatory For Magistrate To Examine Approver Before Committal Of Case: Kerala High Court

Case title: Suo Moto v State of Kerala

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 391

The Kerala High Court recently held that it is mandatory for the Magistrate to examine an accused who was tendered pardon under section 306(4)(a) of CrPC, prior to committing the case to the Sessions Court.

Section 306 of the Code deals with tendering pardon to an accomplice, who turns approver. An approver is also an accused in the crime, but has now agreed to provide details regarding the crime to aid the criminal proceedings in return of being tendered pardon. Section 306(4)(a) provides that an approver shall be examined as a witness by the Magistrate as well as in the subsequent trial.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, held thus:

“Without examining the person accepting the tender of pardon as a witness, the Magistrate could not have committed the case to the Sessions Court, excluding that person from the array of accused. Such a process is without authority and is irregular…If any of the accused was accepted as an approver, then that person should have been examined before committing the case to the Sessions Court treating him as an approver.”

Payment Of Child's Educational Expenses If Reimbursed By Employer Can't Be Treated As Maintenance U/S 125 CrPC: Kerala High Court

Case title: Abdul Mujeeb v Suja

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 392

The Kerala High Court considered whether educational expenses paid to the children which were later reimbursed by the father's employer shall be reckoned as payment towards maintenance allowance under Section 125 CrPC.

The provision stipulates payment of compensation to wife, children and parents.

Justice VG Arun stated that educational expenses paid to children which were later reimbursed cannot be treated as maintenance allowance and held thus:

“It is not in dispute that the petitioner had not paid any amount to the first respondent/wife and payments to the other respondents (children) were towards tuition fees and other educational expenses. The object of Section 125 being to prevent destitution and vagrancy by ensuring reasonable allowance towards maintenance, payment of educational expense, which was later reimbursed, cannot be treated as the maintenance allowance contemplated under Section 125.”

Video Reflects Secular Views, FIR Appears Motivated: Kerala High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To Shajan Skaria In Priest Humiliation Case

Case Title: Shajan Scariya v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 393

The Kerala High Court allowed the anticipatory bail plea moved by Shajan Skaria in the case alleging that he interacted with a priest through his YouTube channel 'Marunadan Malayali' with the intention to insult a religion.

Other Significant Developments This Week

Kerala State Mediation And Conciliation Centre Launches NIRNAYA Scheme

The Kerala State Mediation and Conciliation Centre (KSMCC) officially launched NIRNAYA Scheme, a private mediation process for the resolution of disputes outside the convoluted court procedure. The Scheme was officially launched on Saturday morning at the Kerala High Court Auditorium.

The NIRNAYA Scheme aspires to create a harmonious and co-operative dispute resolution mechanism in different fields such as commerce and film production industry, particularly, the disputes pertaining to construction of apartments.

Diagnostic Centre Not Liable For Unforeseen Circumstances Due To Genuine Test Results; Kerala State Commission Dismisses Complaint

Case Title: Shaji David vs Shafa Diagnostic Centre

Recently, the Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thiruvananthapuram bench, presided over by Jith Kumar (Presiding Member), with Beena Kumari (Member) and Radhakrishnan (Member), dismissed a complaint regarding wrong diagnosis by a diagnostic centre. The Complainant failed to prove that the TPHA (ELISA) test reports granted by the diagnostic centre were faulty. The Commission further rejected the Complainant’s contention that due to wrong reports, his visa for Kuwait was rejected and that the diagnostic centre must compensate him.

Plea In Kerala High Court Challenges State Awards For Malayalam Films 2022 Alleging Nepotism, Bias

Case Title: Lijeesh M.J. @ Lijeesh Mullezhath v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Case Number: WP(C) 25915 of 2023

Malayalam Movie Director, Lijeesh M.J., has moved the Kerala High Court seeking the declaration of Kerala State Awards For Malayalam Films & Writings On Cinema 2022 to be set aside.

The Director of the Malayalam Movie, 'Aakaashathinu Thaazhe' has alleged that the declaration of the Awards was vitiated on account of bias and nepotism exercised by Ranjith, the Chairman of the Kerala State Chalachitra Academy.

Lord Ganesha Myth Remark: NSS Vice President Sangeeth Kumar Moves Kerala High Court For Quashing FIR Over Prayer Rally

Case Title: Sangeeth Kumar v State of Kerala

Case Number: Crl MC 6332/2023

Vice President of the Nair Service Society (NSS) Sangeeth Kumar has moved the Kerala High Court seeking quashing of the FIR registered against him and about a persons for holding a prayer rally to demonstrate against Kerala Assembly Speaker AN Shamseer's remarks about Lord Ganesha, allegedly without permission.

Speaking at an inaugural event in a school in Ernakulam, Shamseer reportedly said that Lord Ganesha is a 'myth'. The Hindu organisation said it will take legal recourse if the government fails to take appropriate steps in the matter.

Kerala Court Acquits MP Hibi Eden, LoP VD Satheeshan, 6 Other Congress Leaders In 2020 Case For Participating In Protest During COVID-19

Case Title: State v. Hibi Eden & Ors.

A Kerala Court recently acquitted eight Congress leaders in the case alleging that they had organized themselves into an unlawful assembly in the year 2020, so as to spread COVID-19, thereby flouting then in force government orders and guidelines of the health department in this regard.

The case was registered in June 2020 against Member of Parliament Hibi Eden, Leader of Opposition VD Satheeshan, the Members of Legislative Assembly TJ Vinod, Anwar Sadath, and Roji M. John, and Congress Leaders V.P. Sajeendran, M.P. John and Tony Chammani.

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Ernakulam, Naina K.V., passed the Order noting that the prosecution failed to adduce evidence to prove the allegations.

Justice AK Jayasankaran Nambiar Of Kerala High Court Awarded Doctorate In Law

Judge of the Kerala High Court, Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, was awarded a Doctorate in Law by the O.P. Jindal Global University at a convocation ceremony held in New Delhi on Monday.

Kerala High Court Refuses For Now Stay On Grant Of Malayalam Film Awards 2022, Seeks State's Response On Director's Plea

Case Title: Lijeesh M.J. @ Lijeesh Mullezhath v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Case Number: WP(C) 25915 of 2023

The Kerala High Court sought the response of the State government on the plea filed by Malayalam Movie Director, Lijeesh M.J., seeking to set aside the declaration of Kerala State Awards For Malayalam Films & Writings On Cinema 2022.

The Single Judge Bench of Justice Basant Balaji declined to grant a stay for now on the distribution of the Awards scheduled on August 17, 2023. However, it listed the matter on August 11, i.e. before the Award distribution ceremony seeking State's response.

Kerala Court Convicts Man For Making More Than 300 Phone Calls To Police Station To Harass Woman Police Officer

Case Title: State v. Jose R.

A Kerala Court recently convicted a man for making more than 300 phone calls to the official phone of Vanitha police station, Kochi city, in order to harass a woman Civil Police Officer.

The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam, Sajini B.S. sentenced the accused to rigorous imprisonment for a period of 3 years and imposed with a fine of Rs. 15,000.

Kerala Court Orders Conditional Attachment Of Police Sub-Inspector's Property For Prima Facie Custodial Torture Of Kollam Lawyer

Case title: C Jayakumar v G Gopakumar & Ors

Case number: IA 1/2022 in OS 55/2022

A Kerala Court has ordered conditional attachment of a Police Sub-Inspector's property for prima facie custodial torture of a Kollam based lawyer.

Sub Judge Santhosh Das at Karunagapally has also asked the officer to either furnish security of ₹25,00,000 or show cause why he shall not furnish the security, by October 19.

Female Students Of Mar Athanasius College At Kothamangalam Approach Kerala High Court Against 'Discriminatory' Hostel Entry Timings

Case Title: Rachel Mathew & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Case Number: WP(C) 25929 of 2023

A plea has been moved in the Kerala High Court by 33 female engineering students of Mar Athanasius College, Kothamangalam, against the imposition of hostel entry deadline as 6:30 PM for the female students.

Single Judge Bench of Justice Basant Balaji has listed the case on Friday along with other connected cases.

Kerala High Court Directs WCD Secretary To Propose Steps To Ensure Children Are Not Compelled To Perform 'Theyyam' Ritual Dance

Case Title: Dhisha v. Union of India & Ors.

Case Number: W.P. (C) 15800/ 2023

The Kerala High Court on Thursday directed the Secretary, Department of Woman and Child Development to file an affidavit detailing the concrete steps that would be taken to ensure that children would not be compelled to perform the ritualistic dance performance of 'Thee Chamundi Theyyam'.

Take Steps To Ensure Education For Tribal Children, Medical Facilities For Their Families In Nilambur Taluk: Kerala High Court To State

Case Title: Aryadan Shouketh & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Case Number: WP(C) NO. 24828 OF 2023

The Kerala High Court directed the State to come out with steps to ensure that education of tribal children and medical facilities for tribal families in Pothugal, Vazhikadavu, and Karulai villages in Nilambur Taluk are not hindered.

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice A.J. Desai and Justice V.G. Arun was considering the plea filed by the former Chairperson of Nilambur Municipality, Aryadan Shouketh, and a social worker residing in Vaniyampuzha colony in Pothugal Grama Panchayat, alleging "grave human rights violation and injustice" faced by the tribal communities in the aforementioned villages.

The Court orally remarked:

"Our immediate priority at present is regarding the reconstruction of the bridge, ensuring that the education of children is not suffered, provision of medical facilities, and toilet facilities. For medical facilities, they have to cross the river...pregnant ladies find it impossible to do so for hospitalization, and so on".

Lord Ganesha Myth Remark: Kerala High Court Stays Proceedings Against NSS Members For Four Weeks

Case Title: Sangeeth Kumar v State of Kerala

Case Number: Crl MC 6332/2023

The Kerala High Court stayed for four weeks all proceedings in connection with a crime registered against Nair Service Society Vice President Sangeeth Kumar and 1,000 identifiable persons purported to be NSS office bearers and activists, for holding a prayer rally to demonstrate against Kerala Assembly Speaker AN Shamseer's remarks about Lord Ganesha, allegedly without permission.

The interim relief was granted by Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V while his plea for quashing the FIR dated August 3.

Original Petition Seeking Reliefs U/S 18-22 Domestic Violence Act Maintainable Before Family Court: Amicus Curiae To Kerala High Court

Case Title: George Varghese v. Treesa Sebastian & Ors.

Case Number: OP (FC) NO. 539 OF 2022

The Amicus Curiae appointed by the Kerala High Court in a case seeking reliefs under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter, 'DV Act, 2005'), Advocate Ashok Kini M., has submitted that an original petition seeking reliefs under Sections18-22 of the Domestic Violence Act is maintainable before the Family Court.

Last week, a Division Bench comprising Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Sophy Thomas had appointed the amicus to aid the Court in ascertaining whether the Family Court would have jurisdiction to entertain such a petition.