Kerala High Court Weekly Round Up: June 13 To June 19 2022

Nominal Index [Citations 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 274 - 287]

Arjun Reghu v. State of Kerala & Anr, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 274

K.K Ibrahim v. Cochin Kaagaz, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 275

Rajan J. Pallan & Anr. v. Municipal Corporation of Thrissur & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 276

Suresh Raj v. National Investigation Agency, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 277

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd v. V. Babu & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 278

Vijay Babu v. State of Kerala & Anr, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 279

Aishwarya Mohan v. Union of India & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 280

K. Sumangala Devi v. Binu P.N & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 281

Rilgin V. George & Anr v. State of Kerala & Anr, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 282

Pauly Vadakkan v. Corporation of Cochin, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 283

Malli v. State of Kerala, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 284

Raveendran A v. Union of India & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 285

Shibily Sahib & Ors. v. Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies & Ors, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 286

C.C Joy v. C.D Mini & Anr, 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 287

Judgments/Orders This Week:

1. Should Not Adopt Hypertechnical Approach When Accused Produces Evidence To Support Plea Of Juvenility: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Arjun Reghu v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 274

The Court has held that courts shall not employ a hypertechnical approach when the accused produces sufficient evidence in support of his argument that he was a juvenile at the time of commission of the crime. Justice A. Badharudeen added that the claimant discharging the burden mentioned in the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act or its Rules is sufficient to prima facie satisfy the Court to decide the question of juvenility.

2. Party Can't Claim Refund Of Court Fee If Dispute Not Settled After Being Referred To Arbitration: Kerala High Court

Case Title: K.K Ibrahim v. Cochin Kaagaz

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 275

The Court has recently held that mere reference of a party for settlement under Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure would not entitle refund of court fee as provided under Section 69A of the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, unless it has been settled between the parties. Justice A. Badharudeen held that although settlement of disputes dealt under Section 89 of CPC includes `arbitration' as well, a party is not entitled to get a refund of the court fee merely because they were referred to arbitration under Section 69 of the Act.

3. Kerala Municipality Rules | Pending Cases Not A Ground For Chairperson To Reject Request To Convene Municipality Meetings: High Court

Case Title: Rajan J. Pallan & Anr. v. Municipal Corporation of Thrissur & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 276

The Court has held that a request for convening a meeting as per Rule 7 of Kerala Municipality (Procedure for Meeting of Council) Rules can be rejected only if the conditions mentioned in the proviso to Rule 7(1) are not complied with or if the request is not made by one-third of the members in the Council existing at that time. Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan also added that pendency of some cases before the Court is not a ground to reject a request for convening a meeting as per Rule 7(1).

4. NIA Court Can Entertain Application For Tender Of Pardon Preferred At Investigation Stage U/S 306 CrPC: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Suresh Raj v. National Investigation Agency

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 277

The Court held that a Special Court constituted under the National Investigation Agency Act can invoke the powers under Section 306 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) to grant pardon to an accused at the post cognizance stage. A Division Bench of Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice C. Jayachandran also opined that it is always advisable for a Special Court to consider an application for grant of pardon by itself if cognizance is taken directly, though it can be referred to the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

5. Motor Accident Death | Kerala High Court Lays Down 'Twin Conditions' To Claim Compensation In Plea Alleging Driver's Negligence

Case Title: Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd v. V. Babu & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 278

The Court has held that in a claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the petitioners must prove not only the negligence on the part of the driver or rider but also prove that the person alleged to have sustained injuries in a motor accident died in consequence of the accidental injuries. Justice A. Badharudeen added that it is the burden of the petitioners to adduce evidence to satisfy the allegations raised by them since grant of compensation therein is based on the principle of `fault' liability.

6. Bailable Offence: Kerala High Court Closes Vijay Babu's Anticipatory Bail Plea In Case For Revealing Identity Of Actress Who Accused Him Of Rape

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

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 279

The High Court has closed the proceedings in an anticipatory bail plea moved by actor-producer Vijay Babu in the case for allegedly revealing on social media, the identity of the actress who has accused him of sexually exploiting her. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas closed the matter upon noting that the actor was booked under bailable offences in that case.

7. CLAT Clearance Mandate For NTPC Law Officer Appointment Violative Of Article 16: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Aishwarya Mohan v. Union of India & Ors

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 280

The High Court has held that the condition mandating applicants to clear CLAT for applying to the post of Assistant Law Officer in National Thermal Power Corporation Limited (NTPC) was violative of Article 16 of the Constitution of India. However, to avoid upsetting the entire selection process, Justice V.G. Arun directed the respondents to accept the petitioner's application and test her eligibility through a selection process.

8. Kerala Education Rules | Right To Preferential Appointment Expires Once Claimant Is Appointed In Any Future Vacancies: HC Full Bench Differs From Precedent

Case Title: K. Sumangala Devi v. Binu P.N & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 281

The Court has ruled that the right to preferential appointment obtained by a claimant under Rule 51A of Chapter XIV-A of the Kerala Education Rules (KER) does not continue to be available to them once this right has been effectuated through an appointment in future vacancies that arise in any category of teaching posts under the same educational agency. A Full Bench of Justice A.K Jayasanaran Nambiar, Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P thereby differed with the position in Sandhya T.N v. Jalaja Kumari & Ors [2008 (3) KLT 655] while adjudicating upon a reference made by the Division Bench doubting the correctness of the proposition of law laid down in the impugned decision.

9. Merely Being In Uniform Does Not Attract S.353 IPC: Kerala High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To Lawyers Accused Of Assaulting Police Officer

Case Title: Rilgin V. George & Anr v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 282

The High Court allowed the anticipatory bail application moved by two lawyers accused of assaulting a police officer in uniform while he was at the Court in relation to an ongoing enquiry against him. Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan decided to allow the plea upon suspecting that they were booked under Section 353 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in a deliberate attempt to implicate them in a non-bailable offence, particularly since that was the only non-bailable offence alleged against them.

10. Bane Of Our System': Kerala High Court Calls For Safety Measures Around Road Work Sites Amid Rising Number Of Accidents

Case Title: Pauly Vadakkan v. Corporation of Cochin

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 283

The Court has urged the State government and the Public Works Department (PWD) to expeditiously draw their attention to introducing and implementing safety protocols in the ongoing road work sites across the State. Justice Devan Ramachandran accordingly asked the Senior Government Pleader to ascertain whether there are any protocols with respect to the security and safety measures to be enforced in the ongoing work sites.

11. Tribal Lynching Case: Family Seeks Replacement Of Prosecutor, Kerala High Court Stays Trial Court Proceedings

Case Title: Malli v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 284

The High Court stayed until further orders, the trial in the murder of 27-year-old tribal youth Madhu, who was beaten to death by a mob at Kadukumanna hamlet in Attappadi in February 2018 allegedly for stealing rice from a grocery shop. Justice Mary Joseph put the proceedings on hold and sought the response of the State on the matter to be informed within 10 days.

12. Kerala High Court Orders Postmortem & DNA Test Of Seafarer Found In Tunisian Waters After Family Suspects Homicide

Case Title: Raveendran A v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 285

The High Court approved the request for a post-mortem and DNA test of the Indian seafarer whose body was found in Tunisian waters after his family raised suspicions of homicide in his death. Justice V.G. Arun also suo moto impleaded the Director General of Police in the plea moved by the father of the 27-year-old seaman who went missing from his vessel.

13. Not Earnest In Discharging Duties Despite Court Orders: Kerala High Court Raps Police Over Postponement Of Cooperative Society Election

Case Title: Shibily Sahib & Ors. v. Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 286

The Court expressed its concern over the inaction of the police to avoid riots at a scheduled election to a Cooperative Society despite specific court orders, which in turn encourages the widespread politicisation of cooperative societies in the State. A Division Bench of Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice C.S Sudha observed that when this Court directs police protection for an election, the police is obliged to ensure that every member willing to cast vote is not obstructed by anyone. It was found that when the Police were informed by the Returning Officer himself that there would be law and order issues on the date of polling, the Police ought to have taken all necessary steps for the smooth conduct of the election.

14. Intention Of Parties A Key Factor To Ascertain Benami Transactions: Kerala High Court

Case Title: C.C Joy v. C.D Mini & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 287

The High Court recently ruled that the intention of the parties is a key factor in determining if a transaction was benami or not, which could be ascertained from the tests laid down by the Apex Court for this purpose. A Division Bench of Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Sophy Thomas also laid down that as long as there is no evidence to the contrary, when a husband purchases property joining his wife as a name lender, he is still the beneficiary of such property, but if it was purchased in her favour, then she would be the beneficiary.

Other Developments:

Kerala High Court Asks State To Produce Alleged FIS In Swapna Suresh's Plea To Quash Conspiracy Case

Case Title: Swapna Prabha Suresh v. Station House Officer & Anr.

The Court directed the prosecution to produce a copy of the FIS and the alleged complaint against Swapna Suresh, the prime accused in the infamous gold smuggling case, in her plea to quash the FIR registered against her for allegedly spreading false information against MLA K.T Jaleel, Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan and the Government. Justice Ziyad Rahman also sought the view of the prosecution and posted the matter on Tuesday.

Also Read: Swapna Suresh Moves Kerala High Court To Quash FIR Alleging Conspiracy Behind Her Remarks Against Chief Minister

Actor Assault Case| Kerala High Court Judge Recuses From Hearing Crime Branch's Plea Seeking Forensic Analysis Of Memory Card

Case Title: State of Kerala v. XXX

Justice Kauser Edappagath of the High Court recused from hearing a petition moved by the Crime Branch challenging the order of the Ernakulam Additional Special Sessions Court which rejected its petition to forward the memory card allegedly containing the visuals of the crime in the 2017 actor sexual assault case for forensic examination.

Actor Assault Case: Kerala High Court Asks Crime Branch To Explain Significance Of Hash Value Change In Memory Card

Case Title: State of Kerala v. XXX

The High Court asked the Crime Branch to explain the significance of a change in the hash value of the memory card in its petition challenging the order of the Ernakulam Additional Special Sessions Court which rejected its petition to forward the memory card allegedly containing the visuals of the crime in the 2017 actor sexual assault case for forensic examination. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas also asked the prosecution if it wasn't better if the accused is also heard in the matter and if this would benefit the accused in any manner.

Also Read: Former Kerala High Court Judge Justice MC Hari Rani Passes Away

Kerala High Court Asks Prosecution To Produce Case Diary In Vijay Babu's Pre-Arrest Bail Plea

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

The High Court continued hearing the anticipatory bail plea moved by Malayalam actor-producer Vijay Babu in the case where an actress accused him of sexually exploiting her. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas asked the prosecution to produce the case diary in the matter while posting it tomorrow to conclude the arguments of the actor. The Court has been hearing the case at length for the last two days, analysing the WhatsApp and Instagram messages between the actor and the complainant in detail to ascertain the relationship between the duo.

Also Read: Kerala High Court Hears Actor Vijay Babu's Anticipatory Bail Pleas In Rape Case In-Camera