Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: February 17 - 23, 2025

Sajeevan Swamy v Johnson and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 112

Hareesh M. S. v The Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd. and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 113

Mrs Shinu K R v State of Kerala & Connected Case, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 114

The Kerala Film Exhibitors Federation v. State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 115

Sadanandan v State of Kerala & Connected Case, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 116

Fathima v Vappinu, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 117

Sheeba Suresh v State of Kerala and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 118

Mohammed Sajjid v State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 119

Sobhanakumari v State Of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 120

C. Krishnankutty Nair v Principal Secretary and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 121

A. K. Thankappan v State of Kerala & Connected Case, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 122

Suo Moto v State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 123

Joint Commissioner (Intelligence and Enforcement) v. M/s Lakshmi Mobile Accessories , 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 124

P C George v State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 125

Sreekala K. v Central Bureau of Investigation and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 126

Rahul Easwar v State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 127

Dr. Hafeez Rahman P. A. v State of Kerala and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 128

Manu Kumar M K V State of Kerala, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 129

The Deputy Commissioner (Intelligence) v. Minimol Sabu, 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 130

Judgments/ Orders This Week

In Ex-Parte Proceedings, Court Is Not Expected To Blindly Pass Orders In Favour Of The Party Which Is Present: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Sajeevan Swamy v Johnson and Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 112

The Kerala High Court has held that in ex-parte proceedings, a Court can pass an order in favour of the party present only if they can successfully establish their rights or the liability of the opposite party. The Division Bench comprising of Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice P. Krishna Kumar added that the court is not expected to blindly pass an order in favour of the party present.

ICC Cannot Proceed With A Complaint Under POSH Act If It Does Not Contain Allegation Of Sexual Harassment: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Hareesh M. S. v The Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd. and Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 113

The Kerala High Court held that an Internal Complaints Committee cannot proceed with a compliant if the allegations made in it does not constitute 'sexual harassment' under Section 2(n) of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act). 

Justice D. K. Singh said that in such cases, the jurisdictional fact for taking cognizance does not exist.

Appointment As Govt Pleader Or Public Prosecutor Not A 'Right', No Reservation Provided For Persons With Benchmark Disabilities Under RPwD Act: Kerala HC

Case Title: Mrs Shinu K R v State of Kerala & Connected Case

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 114

The Kerala High Court has ruled that reservation to persons with benchmark disabilities under Section 34 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 cannot be extended while appointing government pleaders and public prosecutors, as they do not have a specific cadre strength, and therefore, no vacancies within a cadre where such reservations can be applied.

Justice D.K. Singh observed that appointment of advocates as Government Pleaders or Public Prosecutors is a decision of the Government, as they are the client here. It was also stated that no one has an inherent right to claim appointment as Government Pleaders or Public Prosecutors.

Cess Levied On Cinema Tickets U/S 3C Of Kerala Local Authorities Entertainment Tax Act Is Constitutionally Valid: Kerala High Court

Case Title: The Kerala Film Exhibitors Federation v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 115

The  Kerala High Court has stated that cess levied on cinema tickets under Section 3C Of Kerala Local Authorities Entertainment Tax Act is constitutionally  Valid.

“Cess can also mean a tax levied for a special purpose or as an increment to the existing tax and, in given circumstances, a fee. In the case at hand, entertainment tax is already levied under the Act of 1961 and the Cess under Section 3C is an additional levy. Thus, the contention of the Assessee that under Entry 62 of List II of Schedule VII to the Constitution of India, only tax can be levied, and Cess cannot be levied is without merit” stated the Division Bench of Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice S. Manu.

Political Parties Must 'Finish' Opponents On Electoral Battlefield, Norm Of Attacking Rivals Must Be Strictly Dealt With: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Sadanandan v State of Kerala & Connected Case

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 116

The Kerala High Court has increased the fine amount from rupees 25,000 to 50,000 for eight CPI(M) leaders and workers who attacked C. Sadanandan Master, which led to the amputation of his legs. The attack took place due to the political rivalry between CPI (M) and RSS workers, since Sadanandan Master, a former SFI member in college, joined the RSS and became the district Upa Karyavahak of the RSS in Kannur District.

Justice C.S. Sudha observed that the Court cannot show leniency imposed upon the accused persons since that would send a wrong message to society which would only encourage such crimes. The Court called the attack on Sadanandan Master as brutal, dastardly and near fatal attack and stated that he has been waiting for justice for the past 31 years.

Amending Original Plea Before Family Court To Incorporate Reliefs Under Domestic Violence Act Will Not Change Its Nature And Character: Kerala HC

Case Title: Fathima v Vappinu

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 117

The Kerala High Court ruled that amending an original petition filed before the Family Court incorporating reliefs under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is permissible and that it will not change the nature and character of the original petition.

The Court further stated that reliefs to be claimed under Sections 18 to 22 of the DV Act can also be granted by the Family Court under Section 7 of the Family Courts Act to provide protection and justice to the victim.

The Division Bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice M.B. Snehalatha allowed the petition for amendment filed under Order VI Rule 17 CPC to incorporate reliefs under Sections 18 to 22 of the DV Act.

Scooter Scam: Kerala HC Directs Police To Send Notice To Congress Activist Sheeba Suresh If Arraigned As Accused

Case Title: Sheeba Suresh v State of Kerala and Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 118

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (18^th February) ordered that the concerned officer shall send a notice to former Kumily Panchayat President and Congress activist Sheeba Suresh if she is implicated in the scooter scam case registered in Kumily Polce Station. The case is now registered only against Ananthu Krishnan for allegedly cheating a number of persons in the State by collecting money after promising to provide electric scooters at 50% of the price.

When the case came up for hearing before Justice P. V. Kunhikrishnanon Tuesday, the Public Prosecutor informed the court that the petitioner is not yet arraigned as an accused in the case. The Court closed the petition saying that if she is implicated in the offence in future, the officer concerned shall issue notice to her in accordance with law.

S.187(3) BNSS | Default Bail Can Be Granted After 60 Days For Offence Punishable With Imprisonment Which May Extend To 10 Yrs: Kerala HC

Case Title: Mohammed Sajjid v State of Kerala

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 119

The Kerala High Court has granted default bail under Section 187(3) BNSS to an accused in a drugs case, booked under Section 22(b) of NDPS Act punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years (maximum ten years punishment), after 60 days in custody.

Justice PV Kunhikrishnan did not apply Section 187(3)(i) to the Petitioner-accused, noting that the maximum punishment that can be imposed upon the Petitioner is up to ten years, whereas Section 187(3)(i) relates to offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of ten years or more.

Don't Hesitate To Quash False Cases: Kerala HC Cautions Agencies, Courts Against Misuse Of SC/ST Act By Litigants With 'Evil Thoughts'

Case Title: Sobhanakumari v State Of Kerala

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 120

The Kerala High Court observed that when complaints with the police do not yield desired results, or when there are failed litigations or pending litigations between the parties, the raising of allegations under the SC/ST (POA) Act gives a strong indication that such allegations may be false.

Justice A. Badharudeen cautioned that the investigating agencies and courts have a very vital role to find out truth from false allegations to prevent the misuse of the provisions of the SC/ST (POA) Act. The Court further stated that false cases must be quashed without hesitation.

Kerala High Court Emphasises Importance Of Careful Selection Of CWC Members Who Have Actively Been Involved With Issues Of Children In Past

Case Title: C. Krishnankutty Nair v Principal Secretary and Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 121

The Kerala High Court emphasized that the members of the Child Welfare Committee should have been actively involved with issues related to children namely their health, education or welfare activities before being appointed to the post.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice S. Manu emphasized that such a qualification is essential considering the duties of the members of the Committee.

Kerala High Court Quashes Case Against Former ADM Who Allegedly Recommended Arms License For 'Thokku Swami'

Case Title: A. K. Thankappan v State of Kerala & Connected Case

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 122

The Kerala High Court quashed further proceedings under Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act) against former Additional District Magistrate for recommending to give Arms license to Bhadranandaji popularly known as 'Thokku Swami'.

In the instant case, it was alleged that the arms license was given to the Bhadranandaji due to the personal recommendation given by the then Additional District Magistrate. The former ADM and Bhadranandaji was booked under Section 13(1)(d)(i) and (ii) of the PC Act, Rule 51-A (suppressing any factual information or giving any false information in the application) of Arms Rule and Section 30 (Punishment for contravention of license or rule) of the Arms Act. They both had approached the Court to quash further proceedings in the case against them.

Justice P. G. Ajithkumar said that as per Section 13 of the Arms Act and Rule 2(5) of the Arms Rules, the District Magistrate is the authority empowered to grant license and it was upon him to get the report of the police officer in the nearest police station on getting an application for license. The Court held that the Collector was not bound by the recommendation of the ADM and hence ADM cannot be accused of misusing his official position as required under Section 13(d)(ii) of the PC Act.

Kerala Floods: High Court Closes Suo Moto Case Over Dam Water Level Regulation, Takes Note Of Steps Taken By State For 'Monsoon Preparedness'

Case Title: Suo Moto v State of Kerala

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 123

The Kerala High Court has closed its suo moto case initiated in 2020 for safety evaluation of dams, monitoring dam shutters and regulating dam water levels in the State, in light of frequent flooding.

While doing so, the Division Bench of Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice S. Manu took note of various steps implemented by the State government since 2020, to ensure better management of monsoon in the State.

Consolidated SCN Involving Multiple Assessment Years Can Be Issued Only When Common Period Of Adjudication Exists: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Joint Commissioner (Intelligence and Enforcement) v. M/s Lakshmi Mobile Accessories 

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 124

The  Kerala High Court stated that consolidated show cause notice involving multiple assessment years can be issued when common period of adjudication exists.

“Issuing a consolidated show cause notice covering various financial/assessment years would cause prejudice to an assessee who would not get the full period envisaged for adjudication under the Statute, if that period is circumscribed by the limitation period prescribed in relation to an earlier financial/assessment year” stated the Division Bench of Justices A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Easwaran S.

Kerala High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To BJP Leader P C George In Hate Speech Case

Case Title: P C George v State of Kerala

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 125

The Kerala High Court today dismissed the anticipatory bail application filed by BJP leader PC George, booked for allegedly making hate speech against the Muslim community during a channel debate.

Justice P V Kunhikrishnan dismissed the bail application.

Lack Of Mandatory Jail Sentence For Hate Speech Crimes Serious Matter : Kerala High Court Flags Issue To Parliament & Law Commission

Case Title: P C George v State of Kerala

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 125

While denying anticipatory bail to BJP leader PC George in a case for making remarks against the Muslim community, the Kerala High Court expressed concerns about the rising frequency of statements based on caste and religion.

"Nowadays, there is a tendency to make statements based on religion, caste etc. These are against the basic structure of our Constitution. These tendencies should be nipped in the bud," Justice PV Kunhikrishnan observed in the bail order.

The Court also flagged an inadequacy in the present penal provisions dealing with hate speeches, as the offender can get by paying a fine. The Court further pointed out that even second-time offenders are not subjected to higher punishment and emphasized that this issue requires consideration by the Parliament and the Law Commission.

Police Can Freeze Bank Accounts U/S 102 CrPC For Crimes Under Prevention Of Corruption Act: Kerala High Court

Case Title: Sreekala K. v Central Bureau of Investigation and Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 126

Kerala High Court has held that freezing of a person's bank accounts under Section 102 of Code of Criminal Procedure while investigating his involvement in offences under Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act) is valid. 

Justice C. Jayachandran rejected the petitioner-accused's argument that the freezing should have been done only through the Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, 1944.

The Court however held that these provisions had separate objectives and the seizure under CrPC cannot be found fault with. 

The Court said that Section 102 provides for seizure of property which is suspected to have been stolen or which is found in circumstances creating suspicion of commission of an offence. It observed that Section 102 is invoked as a step in aid of investigation, to seize a piece of evidence. On the other hand, the Ordinance aims to secure the money which has been procured by the accused by means of a scheduled offence so that the same can be forfeited if the accused is ultimately found guilty.

Kerala High Court Closes Bail Plea By Rahul Easwar In Criminal Case Filed By Actress Upon Being Told Offences Were Bailable

Case Title: Rahul Easwar v State of Kerala

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 127

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (18th February) closed a bail petition moved by Rahul Easwar on being informed by the Public Prosecutor that the offences alleged against him were bailable. Justice P. V. Kunhikrishnan has directed Rahul Easwar to appear before the police station as per the notice served to him by the police.

To Protect Interest Of Minor Victims, Preserve Evidence': Kerala HC Directs Doctors To Preserve Foetuses After Performing Abortion On Minors

Case Title: Dr. Hafeez Rahman P. A. v State of Kerala and Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 128

The Kerala High Court has given a direction to the Director of the State Health Department to inform all doctors of the State to preserve the fetus of minor victims and to get written permission from the Investigating Officer/ District Police Superintendent in order to destroy it. 

Justice A. Badharudeen observed that this was required to protect the interest of the minor victims and to ensure that the accused does not flee trial for want of vital piece of evidence.

Compassionate Employment Cannot Be Denied To Dependents Who Have Been 'Fighting For Claim' By Fixing Subsequent Cut-Off Date: Kerala HC

Case Title: Manu Kumar M K V State of Kerala

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 129

The Kerala High Court recently stated that when the benefits of a compassionate employment scheme have been extended to the dependants of employees of private aided colleges, then neither the government nor the college authorities can deny these benefits to the dependants who have been fighting for this cause by fixing a subsequent cut-off date for availing the benefit of the scheme.

In this case, the petitioners were denied compassionate employment on the grounds that the benefit would only be extended to the dependents of employees of private aided colleges who passed away after October 7, 2013.

Justice N.Nagaresh stated that the government in an earlier writ petition filed by the petitioners had already accorded sanction to the management to ignore the cut-off date.

Article 226 Can't Be Invoked Against An SCN Issued U/S 74 Of CGST Act At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court

Case Title: The Deputy Commissioner (Intelligence) v. Minimol Sabu

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 130

The  Kerala High Court stated that Article 226 cannot be invoked against a show cause notice issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act at preliminary stage.

“Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not meant to be used to break the resistance of the Revenue in this fashion. In exercise of such jurisdiction, the High Court is required to refrain from issuing directions to the authorities under the taxation statute to decide issues in stages or on a preliminary basis,” stated the Division Bench of Justices A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Easwaran S.

Other Important Developments This Week

Hate Speech Case: Kerala HC Expresses Disinclination To Grant Anticipatory Bail To Former MLA PC George, Notes Repeated Flouting Of Orders

Case Title: P C George v State of Kerala

Case No: Bail Appl. 1874/2025

The Kerala High Court has expressed its disinclination to grant anticipatory bail to former MLA PC George, booked for allegedly making hate speech against the Muslim community during a channel debate.

Justice P V Kunhikrishnan remarked that PC George has been repeatedly flouting the orders of the Magistrate Court as well as that of the High Court. The High Court had previously granted him bail on the condition that he would refrain from making provocative statements.

"Tarnishes Image Of Institution": Kerala High Court Expresses Concern Over FIR Against Former HC Judge CN Ramachandran Nair In CSR Scam Case

Case Title: Saijo Hassan v State of Kerala 

Case No: WPC No. 6572/2025

The Kerala High Court has expressed its concerns against the registration of an FIR against former Kerala High Court Justice C N Ramachandran Nair as an accused in the CSR funds scam case.

The Court expressed its concerns in a public interest litigation filed by advocates from the High Court for quashing the FIR to the extent that it identifies the retired judge as an accused. The PIL has been filed stating that the crime has been registered based on a frivolous complaint without even conducting a preliminary inquiry. The PIL is filed stating that registration of crime against the retired judge would tarnish the reputation of the judiciary in the minds of the people. 

The Division Bench of Justice A. Muhammad Mustaque and Justice P. Krishna Kumar orally enquired whether the police had registered the FIR against the former judge with proper application of mind. The Court orally stated that registration of crime against a person who has held a constitutional office would affect the entire image of the institution.

Kerala HC Seeks Clarification On Elephant Booking & Transport Procedure Followed By Guruvayoor Devaswom For Temple Festivals After Death Of 3 Elderly Persons

Case Title: Sangita Iyer v Guruvayoor Devaswom Represented By Its Secretary

Case No: WP(C) NO. 16514 OF 2023

The Kerala High Court has directed the Deputy Administrator (Livestock) of Guruvayoor Devaswom to file an affidavit before the Court outlining the procedure followed in Guruvayoor Devaswom for booking and transporting Elephants from Punnathur Anakotta for other temple festivals.

The Division Bench of Justice Anil K.Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishna S. observed Elephants are frequently taken out to distant places for Temple festivals. The Court thus directed to ensure that Elephants are adequately fed when taken out from Punnathur Anakotta to other places.

Can State Govt Use Existing Effluent Treatment Plant Of HIL Or Construct New Plant To Clean River Periyar: Kerala HC Asks Centre To Respond

Case Title: Periyar Malineekarana Virudha Samithi v State Of Kerala & Connected Matters

Case Number: WP(C) 996/ 2012 & Connected Matters

The Kerala High Court recently directed the central government to inform the State Government whether it can use the existing Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP) owned by Hindustan Insecticides Limited (HIL), whose operations were permanently shut down, if a ETP should be constructed, for which 75 cents of land has been sought from HIL on lease.

The Division Bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice M.B. Snehalatha has thus directed the competent Secretary of the Government of India to respond to the request of the State Government so as to clean the “Kuzhikandam Thodu” of the Periyar River.

India A Secular Country, Mandatory Jailtime Needed For Promoting Enmity On Religious Lines: Kerala HC Remarks In PC George's Anticipatory Bail Plea

Case Title: P C George v State of Kerala

Case No: Bail Appl. 1874/2025

The Kerala High Court, today, orally stated that persons committing offences promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion must be given a mandatory jail sentence, and should not be allowed to avoid imprisonment by merely paying a fine.

The Court made these remarks while considering the anticipatory bail application of former MLA PC George, booked for allegedly making hate speech against the Muslim community during a channel debate.

Justice P V Kunhikrishnan stated that India is a secular country and people should not be using caste and religion to promote enmity between different groups. Referring to the punishment in Sections 196(1)(a) and 299, the Court orally said that even repeated offenders can get away by merely paying a fine.

Contempt Plea Filed In Kerala HC Against ASHA Workers Protest Outside Trivandrum Secretariat For Allegedly Blocking Roads, Footpath

Case Title: N Prakash v Ramesh Chennithala MLA & Ors.

Case No: Con. Case No. 481/2025

A contempt case has been filed before the Kerala High Court against the ASHA workers (Accredited Social Health Activists) protest which is allegedly conducted by blocking the road and footpath in front of the Secretariat in Thiruvananthapuram district from February 10, 2025.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice S.Manu has directed the Registry to place the contempt petition before the Special Bench for hearing.

Kerala HC Directs Accused In Question Paper Leak Case To Appear Before Police To Record Statement, Protects Him From Arrest Till February 25

Case Title: Shuhaib v State of Kerala

Case No: BA 619/ 2025

The Kerala High Court has directed the CEO and Founder of M S Solutions–Shuhaib who is accused of leaking Class 10 Question Papers through his YouTube channel, to appear before the police on February 22. 

Justice P. V. Kunhikrishnan further directed the investigating officer to record his statement and submit a report before the Court. It said the petitioner shall not be arrested till next Tuesday (February 25).

Wayanad Landslides: KSDMA Details Plan To Remove Debris From Rivers Before Start Of Monsoon

Case Title: In Re: Prevention And Management Of Natural Disasters In Kerala V State Of Kerala

Case Number: WP(C) 28509/ 2024 & Connected Cases

The Member Secretary of the Kerala State Disaster Management Authority (KSDMA) submitted before the High Court on Friday (21^st February) that steps were being taken to remove debris left in the rivers in the aftermath of landslide before monsoon.

The Division Bench of the Court comprising of Justice A. K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Easwaran S. was hearing the suo motu case initiated by the High Court in the aftermath of large-scale landslides that hit Wayanad in July 30, 2024.