Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: November 28 To December 4, 2022

Nominal Index [Citation 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 618-631]Muhammed Shanavas v. Radhakrishnan & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 618Hussain v. State of Kerala and another 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 619Memana Baby v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 620State of Kerala rep. by the Addl. Secretary to the Government v. The Chancellor 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 621Nandakumar T.P v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Sanal Kumar v. State 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 622Sindhu and anr. v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 623Adv. P.V. Jeevesh v. Union of India & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 624Ratheesh P.K. & Anr v. Cochin International Airport Ltd & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 625Kerala Private Hospitals Association v. Advocate Sabu P. Joseph 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 626 Wilson C.C. v. State of Kerala 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 627Anti-Corruption Peoples Movement and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Ors and Connected Cases 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 628Rahul P.U. v. The Geologist and Other Connected Cases 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 629State Of Kerala v. Eldhose Kunnapilly and XXXXX v. State of Kerala & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 630 M/s Crescent Construction Versus Deputy Commissioner of State Tax 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 631Orders/Judgments This Week'Courts Created To Adjudicate Substantial Interest Of Parties, Not Dispose Cases In Numerical Quantity': Kerala High CourtCase Title: Muhammed Shanavas v. Radhakrishnan & Ors.Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 618The Kerala High Court recently said that a solitary instance of absence of a counsel or party on the day the case is listed cannot be a ground for the application being dismissed for default.The division bench of Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen said:"The courts are created to adjudicate substantial interest of the parties rather than to dispose the cases in a numerical quantity. The court should be very sensitive in dealing with the cases of litigants, especially, many of the cases are remained non represented due to laches or negligence on the part of the counsel".Prosecution Can Be Allowed To Produce Evidence In Addition To Materials Submitted With Final Report If They're Necessary For Fair Trial: Kerala HCCase Title: Hussain v. State of Kerala and anotherCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 619The Kerala High Court has observed that the Court may permit the prosecution to tender such evidence which appears to be essential to decide the case in a just manner, even after the commencement of the trial.Justice A. Badharudeen observed that:It is true that the prosecution is duty bound to place all the evidence to be tendered along with the final report and copies thereof shall be furnished to the accused, as mandated under Section 208 Cr.P.C, in a Sessions trial.'Suspicion, However Grave, Cannot Take Place Of Proof': Kerala HC Acquits Accused Charged With Abetment Of SuicideCase Title: Memana Baby v. State of KeralaCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 620The Kerala High Court recently held that in order to constitute an offence under Section 306 of the IPC the prosecution must establish firstly that a suicide has been committed, and secondly that the person who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide, has played an active role in the same with such a mens rea.The Single Judge Bench of Justice P.G. Ajithkumar observed that even if circumstantial evidence is being relied upon to prove the same in the absence of direct evidence, the chain of evidence must be complete and the conclusion which is arrived after examining the chain of evidence must point towards the culpability of the accused and not to any other conclusion. The bench reiterated the settled position of law that in a case of circumstantial evidence, the court has to scrutinize each and every circumstantial possibility, which is placed before it in the form of evidence and the evidence must point towards only one conclusion, which is the guilt of the accused.Kerala High Court Dismisses State Government's Plea Against Chancellor Appointing Ciza Thomas As VC In-Charge Of KTUCase Title: State of Kerala rep. by the Addl. Secretary to the Government v. The ChancellorCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 621The Kerala High Court on Tuesday dismissed the petition filed by the State Government against the order of the Chancellor appointing Ciza Thomas as the Vice Chancellor in charge of the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University.Justice Devan Ramachandran observed that there was no doubt that Thomas was fully qualified going by the UGC Regulations, since it permits experience in both teaching and research, and since she was working as the Senior Joint Director in Directorate of Technical Education, the choice was justified.Kerala High Court Expresses Concerns About Students Amidst Disputes Between State Govt & Chancellor; Urges To Iron Out DifferencesCase Title: State of Kerala rep. by the Addl. Secretary to the Government v. The ChancellorCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 621The Kerala High Court on Tuesday reminded that Constitutional functionaries such as the State Government and the Governor...

Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: November 28 To December 4, 2022

Athira Prasad

Tags