Skip to main content

Important Kerala High Court Judgments April 2019

Administrative Law - Having silently participated in the whole process of selection without agitating their contentions at any time before the selection process started, they cannot be heard to say that the ranked list already published should be disturbed. V. Chitambaresh & A.M. Babu, JJ. Sheeja U.M. v. Director of Collegiate Education, O.P. (KAT) No. 119 of 2019 12-04-2019

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Section 80 - Incorporating an application for issuance of an urgent commission in a money suit against the State without any substantive or interim relief, which can be qualified as an urgent or immediate relief, cannot be instituted without a notice under Section 80(2) of the Code. Trial court should have returned the plaint in accordance with the proviso to Section 80(2) of the Code. A. Hariprasad, J. Santhamma v. Kerala State, R.S.A. No. 19 of 2010 12-04-2019

Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 (Kerala) - Section 15 (1) -  It is from the antecedent inclinations of a man that an inference is drawn whether he is likely to act in a manner prejudicial to public order in near future. Such antecedent conduct should be proximate in time and one should be able to reasonably predict that such person is likely to indulge in anti social activities in the immediate future. C.T. Ravikumar & Nagaresh, JJ. Anil Kumar M.V. v. State of Kerala, W.P. (C) No. 7475 of 2019 12-04-2019

Murder Trial - the prosecution is not bound to explain each and every injury found on the body of the accused unless there are materials on record to show that such injury has some nexus with the incident in which death was caused. A.M. Shaffique & A.M. Babu, JJ. Ameen v. State of Kerala, Crl.A. No. 100 of 2015 12-04-2019



Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 376 (2) (n) - Bail Application - A police constable, preferably a woman constable is deputed to the residence of the lady de facto complainant, within once in six weeks, to ascertain from her whether she has been subject to any intimidation or influence by the petitioner or his men. Alexander Thomas, J. Baladhandapani v. State of Kerala, B.A. No. 2503 of 2019 11-04-2019

Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Murder - Child Witness - A child, who sees the traumatic incident of his mother being attacked by his father or anyone else, would not be able to forget such an incident and we cannot believe that his testimony is just an imagination of a child. A.M. Shaffique & Ashok Menon, JJ. Tom P.J. @ George v. State of Kerala, Crl.A. No. 260 of 2014 11-04-2019

Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Murder - Motive - Extra-Judicial Confession - Circumstantial Evidence - In cases where there is no direct evidence, and the prosecution case hinges on circumstantial evidence, motive assumes importance, and needs to be fully established like any other incriminating circumstance. Ayyppankutty v. State of Kerala, 11-04-2019

Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 143, 144, 147, 188, 341, 308, 120(b) read with 149 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 439 - Regular Bail -  Sabarimala Violence - It is rather unfortunate that the individuals who holds high position in major political parties, resort to unconstitutional practices to achieve their political objectives. The impugned restriction of entry of the Hindu women in the age group concerned, is in flagrant violation of their fundamental right to practise religion guaranteed by the Constitution of India. Certainly citizenry and civil society and those who are concerned with the polity, are certainly entitled to make their critiques of any judgments that may be passed by the court of law, including the Constitutional courts. However, the action of the taking law into one's own hand so as to obstruct the enforcement of the specific directions and orders of the court of law, more so particularly that of the Apex Court, cannot be countenanced and trends of this nature cause great concern to all those who have the welfare of the country in mind. The adoption of the Constitution is inextricably entwined" in our lives and it is in our best interest to pay attention to its advice and "if we do not, our hubris will result in sharp descent into chaos. Alexander Thomas, J. Prakash Babu v. State of Kerala, B.A. No. 2454 of 2019 11-04-2019

Popular posts from this blog

500+ Supreme Court of India Judgments on Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 with Head Notes & Citations

1. Mallamma (dead) By Lrs. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. [07-04-2014] 

Whether Plaint can be Rejected only against one of the Defendant(s) [SC JUDGMENT]

The Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 7 Rule 11 (d) – Rejection of Plaint - Relief of reject the plaint only against one of the defendant(s) – Held, Such a relief “cannot be entertained” in exercise of power under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of CPC - the relief of rejection of plaint in exercise of powers under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of CPC cannot be pursued only in respect of one of the defendant(s) - the plaint has to be rejected as a whole or not at all, in exercise of power Order 7 Rule 11 (d) of CPC - the plaint as presented must proceed as a whole or can be rejected as a whole but not in part.

When Magistrate may Dispense with Personal Attendance of Accused [SC Judgment] | First Law

Criminal Procedure Code, 1972 - Ss. 205 & 317 - Magistrate may dispense with personal attendance of accused - Provision for inquiries and trial being held in the absence of accused in certain cases - Discussed.