Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: February 24 - March 02, 2025

Nominal Index [Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 131-148]Sharanya v State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 131Sarika S. v Radhamma and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 132Linimol K v Union of India, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 133x v The Deputy Superintendent of Police and Another, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 134Sajitha Abdul Nazar v Union of India, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 135Dr Ditto Tom P. v State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 136Saijo Hassan v State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 137State of Kerala v Abdul Gafoor and Others & Connected Cases, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 138The Mannam Sugar Mills Co-Operative Ltd. V Deputy Superintendent Of Police, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 139HDB Financial Services Limited v The Sub Registrar and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 140Prasad S. v Union of India, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 141Sreeraj K. C. v State of Kerala and Another, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 142Noushad K . v State of Kerala and Another, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 143Anzar Azeez v State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 144M/s Ramanattu Motor Corp. v. State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 145Afeefa Khadir v State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 146Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd v Raphel & Co., 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 147Ashok Harry Pothen Vs. The Authorised Officer, M/S. Indian Bank, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 148Judgments/Orders This WeekMental Health Act Bars Punishing Persons For Offences Committed While Attempting Suicide : Kerala High CourtCase Title: Sharanya v State of KeralaCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 131The Kerala High Court ruled that convicting and sentencing a person under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code for other offences is illogical when they have attempted to commit suicide in the course of same transaction. The Court held that, under Section 115 of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, such prosecution is barred unless the prosecution proves that the individual was not under severe stress.The Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and Justice P. V. Balakrishnan stated that Section 115 creates a statutory presumption that a person who attempted suicide is under severe stress, unless proven otherwise and therefore cannot be prosecuted under the IPC for other offences committed in the same transaction. The Court thus declared all proceedings against the appellant as illegal and set it aside.Kerala High Court Allows Institution Of Fresh Suit Over Litigant's Claim That Proper Relief Could Not Be Sought Due To Wrong Legal AdviceCase Title: Sarika S. v Radhamma and OthersCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 132The Kerala High Court recently allowed a petitioner to withdraw a suit which was at the appellate stage upon seeing that proper reliefs were not incorporated in the original suit.The petitioner had filed a suit seeking a declaration of easement right of prescription over a property and for consequential injunction against the defendants. The trial court dismissed the suit saying that she failed to prove ingredients for claiming the right of easement by prescription.Justice K. Babu noted that the trial court had found that the property was landlocked and the plaintiff could have succeeded in establishing easement rights by necessity.Kerala High Court Grants Extraordinary Family Pension To Kin Of CRPF Personnel Who Died On Duty, Denied On Allegation Of Being InebriatedCase Title: Linimol K v Union of IndiaCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 133The Kerala High Court recently granted extraordinary family pension to the wife of a deceased CRPF personnel who died during the course of his duty due to drowning in a tank of water while employed as Constable General duty in the 85th Battalion (Bn) deployed in Chhattisgarh.In doing so the court held that when the Court of Inquiry (CIF) conducted by the CRPF did not indicate that the deceased was in an inebriated state, the Pension Accounting Office (PAO) cannot deny extraordinary family pension under Central Civil Service (Extraordinary Pension) Rules of 1972 to his family.Justice D.K. Singh relied upon the Apex Court decision in Renu Devi v Union of India(2020) which held that death occurring due to participation in sports events/adventures/activities would also be considered as death in the performance of duty.POCSO Act | Physical Contact Of Penis With Female Genital Constitutes 'Penetrative Sexual Assault', Vaginal Insertion Not Necessary: Kerala HCCase Title: x v The Deputy Superintendent of Police and AnotherCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 134The Kerala High Court has held that penetration of male genital organ within the labia majora or vulva without penetrating the vagina will constitute the offence of penetrative sexual assault under Section 3 of POCSO Act.The Division Bench comprising Justice P. B. Suresh Kumar and Justice Jobin Sebastian read the explanation of 'vagina' given under Section 375 of IPC into the POCSO Act by way of Section 2(2) of POCSO Act. “… penetration of the male genital organ within the labia majora or the vulva, with or without any emission of semen or even an attempt at penetration into the private part of the victim...

Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: February 24 - March 02, 2025

Tellmy Jolly

Tags