Weekly Roundup (Dec 08 - Dec 14, 2025)
2025 (6) KLT 521 : 2025 KLT OnLine 3447
Abdul Azeez v. Union of India
Banking Regulation Act 1949, S. 35A -- The RBI, as the central bank responsible for managing the nation’s currency and banking system, has wide powers under Section 35A of the Banking Regulation Act to protect the banking system and the economy -- The RBI cannot close its eyes to the large-scale financial cybercrimes being perpetrated through bank accounts without taking effective preventive measures.
2025 (6) KLT 535 : 2025 KLT OnLine 3397
Shyamohan v. State of Kerala
Constitution of India, Art.226 -- Sabarimala -- Access to Traditional route/Kanana Patha -- Travancore Devaswom Board -- Reserve Forest is not a transit route.
2025 (6) KLT 542 : 2025 KLT OnLine 3476
Jimmy Elias v. Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd.
Limitation Act 1963, Schedule Art. 1 & Schedule Art. 14 -- When there is only a contract for sale of goods and to pay for them and the payments made by the defendants go in reduction of their debt to the plaintiff, the suit is not based on a mutual, open and current account falling within the description of a suit under Article 1 of the Limitation Act.
2025 (6) KLT 548 : 2025 KLT OnLine 3532
Kore Security Services (P) Ltd. v. Controlling Authority Under the Payment of Gratuity Act
Payment of Gratuity Act 1972, Ss. 4(2) & 2(s) -- Minimum Wages Act 1948 -- If the legislature thought it necessary that the concept of minimum wages should be factored for calculating gratuity under the Gratuity Act, the same would have been specifically mentioned in Section 4(2) of the Gratuity Act or in the definition of ‘wages’ in Section 2(s) of the Gratuity Act -- The Court cannot read into the provisions of the Gratuity Act words which are clearly not there and hold that the term ‘are paid or are payable’ in Section 2(s) of the Gratuity Act indicates a reference to the Minimum Wages Act.
2025 (6) KLT 554 : 2025 KLT OnLine 3516
Safia v. State of Kerala
Practice and Procedure – Criminal Law – Limitation Act 1963, Schedule Art.137 – Nullum tempus aut locus occurrit regi -- Since a criminal offence is a wrong against the State and the Society, notwithstanding that it has been committed against an individual, a mere delay in the prosecution approaching a court of law would not by itself be a ground for dismissing the case against an accused.
2025 (6) KLT 562 (SC) : 2025 KLT OnLine 3519 (SC)
Rikhab Chand Jain v. Union of India
Practice and Procedure -- Constitution of India, Art.226 -- Alternative Remedy not a bar – Principles summarised.
2025 (6) KLT 567 : 2025 KLT OnLine 3531
Binu Thankappan v. State of Kerala
Penal Code 1860, Ss.141 & 149 -- Though the assembly of persons must be a minimum of five, to even allege the existence of an unlawful assembly, it is not the mandate of law that only if five persons are convicted can there be an unlawful assembly -- If the court comes to the conclusion that there was, in fact, an assembly of five or more persons, but the persons arrayed by the prosecution were not entirely those five, still, nothing prevents the court from convicting those persons who were found to be part of the unlawful assembly.
2025 (6) KLT 577 : 2025 KLT OnLine 3496
Rajeev v. State of Kerala
Sports Act 2000 (Kerala), S. 8(4) – Constitution of India, Sch.VII List III Entry 33 -- The Government indeed has superseding powers over the decision of the State Council.
2025 (6) KLT 589 : 2025 KLT OnLine 3540
Thevan Sreedharan v. State of Kerala
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, Ss.141(1)(b), 2(1)(d) & 2(1)(e) -- It is only against the person who executes the bond or bail bond to keep the peace, and who violates the conditions in the bond or bail bond, can be proceeded against by ordering his arrest and detention and not to his sureties.
2025 (6) KLT 592 : 2025 KLT OnLine 3448
Mohammed Abbas v. State of Kerala
Evidence Act 1872, S. 73 -- Since, no bar is placed in the Identification of Prisoners Act from taking specimen handwriting from the accused, there is no illegality in the investigating officer collecting specimen handwriting of the accused and also in relying on the evidence of witness, who has compared the handwriting, to find that the accused has forged certificates/mark lists.
2025 (6) KLT 598 : 2025 KLT OnLine 3549
Jinesh v. Aswathy
Criminal P.C. 1973, S.125 & 125(4) -- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, S.144 & 144(4) -- There should be proof that the wife is habitually engaging in an adulterous life with the partner to invoke the provisions of sub-section (4) of Section 125 of Cr.P.C.
2025 (6) KLT 604 : 2025 KLT OnLine 3499
Down Victor v. State of Kerala
Criminal P.C. 1973, S.304(1) -- Constitution of India, Art. 39A -- Fair Trial -- In a trial before the Court of Sessions, it is mandatory to inform the accused about his right to be defended by a Counsel assigned by the court.
2025 (6) KLT 606 : 2025 KLT OnLine 3508
M/s. P.K. Chandrasekharan Nair and Co. v. M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, S. 11(6) -- The appointment of arbitrator, invoking Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, is a special power conferred on the Court and therefore primary scrutiny of the application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is not a matter to be left to the domain of the arbitrator.
2025 (6) KLT 618 : 2025 KLT OnLine 3542
Tomon v. State of Kerala
Penal Code 1860, S.498A -- The acts of cruelty which attract the offence under Section 498A IPC are offences committed within the privacy of matrimonial home -- The law does not mandate mathematical corroboration nor it does treat independent evidence as a pre requisite for establishing guilt under Section 498A.
Mahesh Joshi v. Directorate of Enforcement
Criminal P.C. 1973, S. 207 -- Constitution of India, Art. 21 – Practice and procedure -- When the record is entirely documentary, and there are many witnesses, documents, and pages involved, and the proceedings are still at the stage of supply of copy of the police report and other documents under Section 207, CrPC, indicating that the commencement of trial is not imminent and that the trial itself is not likely to conclude once started in the near future, the continued detention of the accused requires closer scrutiny in light of constitutional considerations.
Poonam Wadhwa v. Ajay Wadhwa
Family Law -- Custody of child -- When the male child is above five years old and continues to be in the same school where he was studying earlier and he has no issues with his own father and is not willing to part company of his father, an interference with the order of custody passed by the High Court is not required particularly in view of the fact that the mother has visitation rights .
Bijukumar v. Kollampuzha Bhagavathy Temple Attingal Village
Limitation Act 1963, Schedule Art.107 -- A trustee cannot, by setting up his own title to the trust property, acquire by adverse possession a title to the property until he has renounced his possession and re-entered on the property claiming a hostile title.
Rocky v. State of Telangana
Criminal P.C. 1973, S.482 -- When the allegations are neither absurd nor patently improbable, nor is there any express legal bar to prosecution, the Court cannot embark upon an evaluation of the reliability or genuineness of the allegations or the defence documents.
Criminal P.C. 1973, S.482 -- In appellate jurisdiction, the Supreme Court does not ordinarily reappreciate evidence or revisit factual findings of the High Court unless the order suffers from manifest illegality, perversity or arbitrariness.
Sundaresan Pillai v. Devaswom Commissioner Travancore Devaswom Board
Constitution of India Art.226 -- Hindu Law -- Tutelage of Mathapatasalas -- The present system of tutelage to be rigid, inflexible and not attractive to the children for whom it is intended.
State of Jharkhand v. Indian Builders Jamshedpur
Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, Ss.7 & 11 -- Applicability of excepted or prohibitory clauses would primarily depend upon the agreement between the parties, which alone is the guiding principle for the Arbitral Tribunal.
Managing Director, Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd. v. Mathew P. Babu
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, S. 7(4)(c) – The amount of gratuity ordered to be paid at the time of filing the appeal necessarily includes the interest, if any.
Dadu v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Penal Code 1860, S.323 -- When the defence has been successful in placing a probable and believable account of a scuffle having broken out between victim and the accused at the Ganesh Puja pandal, which might have prompted victim to set up a false story of commission of offence on the victim, the accused ought not to be held guilty of an offence under Section 323, IPC.
Amal Kumar v. State of Jharkhand
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 S. 3(1)(s) -- When there is no allegation that the casteist slur was made in a place within public view or that there was any member of the public present at the spot, there is no offence as coming out under Section 3(1)(s) of the Act of 1989.
Salil Mahajan v. Avinash Kumar
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, S.482 -- Court has to take into consideration status report and cannot take a mechanical route in releasing the accused under the extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail.
Sohanvir @ Sohanvir Dhama v. State of U.P.
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, S. 3(1)(s) -- The house of the complainant cannot be considered to be within public view, hence, does not satisfy the statutory requirement that the abuses were made “in any place within public view,” which is an essential component of the offence.
Rani @ Raj Kumari v. Kamlakat Gupta
Motor Vehicles Act 1988, S.166 -- Although the Tribunal and the High Court took the view that the Certificate was not supported with other proof and was not liable therefore to be accepted at its face value, there is no gainsaying that the Certificate and the Khatauni were issued by the employer-Stone Crusher Company -- It is reasonable to accept that the deceased was getting Rs. 6,000/- as monthly salary from the stone crusher company, for, it is normal to expect that a person employed in this stone crusher unit would earn Rs. 6,000/- every month.
Suvej Singh v. Ram Naresh
Practice and procedure – Remand -- Earlier view that in case there were violations of principles of natural justice, the matter was to be remanded for affording opportunity of hearing to the party concerned -- With the passage of time, the view changed -- Any unnecessary remand by a Higher Court generates fresh round of litigation, which should be avoided.
Ashok Kumar Dabas v. Delhi Transport Corporation
Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1972, Rr.26 & 48 -- On resignation by the employee, his past service stood forfeited -- Hence, he will not be entitled to any pension.
Fifa Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Kerala
Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, Ss. 138 & 147 -- Criminal P.C. 1973, S.482 -- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, S.528 -- Once the High Court finally decides a criminal revision petition, the inherent powers cannot be invoked to set aside the conviction and sentence.
Principal, Dr. Somervell Memorial CSI Medical College v. State of Kerala
Kerala University of Health Sciences First Statutes 2013, Statute 2(5)(ii)(v) (As amended) – Notification No.2035/AC-H/2015/KUHS Dt. 24.02.2020 -- The average of pass percentage of previous regular examinations of all existing batches of the same course mentioned in the 2nd limb of Clause 2(5)(ii)(v) can only be the courses in the institution under the same stream, as in the first limb of the clause.
Ratheesh Chandran v. Rema Devi
Criminal P.C. 1973, S.125 -- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, S.144 – Interpretation of statutes – Maintenance -- Unable to maintain herself -- The expression ‘unable to maintain’ in Section 125 of Cr.P.C must be interpreted to mean the actual inability to sustain rather than mere potential earning capacity.
Abhishek Gupta v. Dinesh Kumar
Practice and Procedure -- Constitution of India, Art.226 -- Non joinder -- An order passed in writ jurisdiction without impleading an affected or necessary party is liable to be invalidated on that ground alone.
Practice and Procedure -- Constitution of India, Art.226 -- Non joinder -- A party suffering an adverse order in judicial proceedings where he is not noticed, because he was not a party, cannot be left without a remedy -- Although he can apply for a review, the scope of a review is much narrow than an appeal and would not provide a remedy as effective as an appeal.
Shameera v. Canara Bank
Banking Law – Constitution of India Art.300A – Freezing of account by bank without notice to the account holders – Deprecated.
Suresh v. State of Kerala
Evidence Act 1872, S. 35 -- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012, S. 34(2) -- Even section 35 of the IE Act can be resorted to, for determining the age of a victim in a POCSO offence.
Rajeev v. State of Kerala
Criminal Trial -- Confession of one accused cannot be used as evidence against the co-accused and that the same can be used only to tilt the balance against the co-accused, when the rest of the evidence is sufficient for a conviction.
Criminal Trial -- Evidence Act 1872, S. 9 -- Even though, the evidence of a test identification parade is admissible under Section 9 of the Indian Evidence Act, the same is not a substantive piece of evidence and it can be used only to corroborate the evidence given by the witnesses before the court at the time of trial.
Surender Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh
Penal Code 1860, S.300 Excp. 2 -- The act in question would not fall under Exception 2 because, when there is no evidence to show that the accused or his property was attacked by the deceased, no plea of self-defense or of deceased causing any injury to the appellant was raised and no defense evidence was led to show that the deceased was armed.
Penal Code 1860, S.300 Excp.1 -- When there is not much evidence on record to disclose that provocation was so grave and sudden that the appellant was deprived of his self-control, the case may not fall under Exception 1 to Section 300.
State of West Bengal v. Anil Kumar Dey
Practice and procedure – Precedents – Binding value – Constitution of India Art.141 – Courts ought not to be expected to follow judgments and orders of Supreme Court as binding precedents when, the facts, in light of which the conclusion arrived at, are not properly disclosed and discussed, for law is not always applicable as the black letter of the law and is instead applied to the facts of each case.
Vineeta Srinandan v. High Court of Judicature at Bombay on Its Own Motion
Contempt of Courts Act 1971, S. 12 – Once the appellant-contemnor had, from the very first day of her appearance in the suo motu proceedings, expressed remorse and tendered an unconditional apology, the High Court was required to examine whether such apology satisfied the statutory parameters under Section 12 of the Contempt Act.
Contempt of Courts Act 1971, S. 12 -- The statutory scheme recognises that once a contemnor expresses sincere remorse, even if the apology is not unqualified in form, the Court is competent to accept it and, where necessary, discharge the contemnor or remit the sentence imposed.
Shanavas v. State of Kerala
Ground Water (Control and Regulation) Act 2002 (Kerala), Ss. 14 & 5 -- The State has a statutory obligation under the Act of 2002 to ensure the proper functioning of the Ground Water Authority -- In view of the importance of ground water and the risks of its unregulated use, it is necessary that the State ensure that the Ground Water Authority becomes fully functional and performs its responsibilities effectively.
Baboo Khan v. State of Rajasthan
Penal Code 1860, S. 304 B -- The demand made for gold ornaments at the time of the Chhoochhak ceremony cannot be considered to be a dowry demand as it could have been a demand which was made not in connection with the marriage of the said parties, but at the time of the birth of the child, whereas a dowry demand within the meaning and scope of 304B IPC should be any property or security given or agreed to be given in connection with the marriage.
Jothi v. State rep. by the Inspector of Police
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985, S. 52-A -- When the chain of custody in the present case remains clear and continuous and, at no stage has any evidence been brought out to indicate tampering, substitution or mishandling and, the forensic report confirms the presence of cannabinoids in the sample, which stands in complete harmony with the seizure, some deviation from the ideal procedure envisaged under Section 52-A, such irregularity does not go to the root of the matter nor does it create any reasonable doubt regarding the authenticity of the seized contraband or the identity of the samples analysed.
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985, S. 52-A -- When the prosecution has demonstrated substantial compliance with the statutory requirements and the integrity of the material evidence stands fully preserved, non-compliance with Section 52-A is rejected.
National Cooperative Development Corporation v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Income Tax Act 1961, S. 36(1)(viii) -- Section 36(1)(viii) of the Act is not a general exemption granted to a statutory corporation for all its business activities, rather, it is a specific incentive attached strictly to the profits arising from a defined activity namely, the provision of long-term finance.
Percivell Charitable Trust v. State of Kerala
Land Acquisition Act 1894, Ss. 4(1) & 6(1) -- Constitution of India, Art. 226 -- Merely because there is a plan for development by the construction of additional buildings in the “existing playground”, the appellants cannot contend that the disputed property requires to be exempted from land acquisition.
Suresh v. State of Kerala
Criminal Trial -- Appreciation of Evidence -- There is a general tendency to rope in as many persons as possible as having participated in the assault and in such situations, the courts are called upon to be very cautious and required to sift the evidence with care.
Pradeep Arora v. Director, Health Department, Govt. of Maharashtra
Epidemic Diseases Act 1897, Ss. 2, 3 & 4 -- Prevention and Containment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Regulations, Regs. 10 to 13 -- Invocation of laws and Regulations were intended to leave no stone unturned in requisitioning the doctors and the insurance scheme was equally intended to assure doctors and health professionals in the front line that the country is with them.
Gail (India) Ltd. v. Deputy Collector & Competent Authority
Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act 1962, Ss. 6(1) & 9(3) -- Section 6(1) of the PMP Act does not authorize the Competent Authority to conduct an enquiry as to the veracity of the allegations to decide whether the Application is to be submitted by it before the Court of District Judge under Section 9(3) of the PMP Act for removal of the construction objected to.
Rebecca George v. Local Level Monitoring Committee
Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act 2008 (Kerala), Ss. 2(xii) & 5(3) -- When land is declared as 'Pruayidam' in the BTR, unless that decision is revisited or reviewed, the land cannot be included in the data bank – Notice issued by the LLMC to show cause as to why the subject land should not be included in the data bank held to be without jurisdiction.
Koshy Phillip v. Thomas P Mathew
Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, S.11 -- Constitution of India, Art. 215 -- The legislative goal of limiting judicial involvement would be plainly undermined if the proposition that every order issued under Section 11 of the Act is subject to substantive review is accepted -- The High Court, even though has inherent plenary powers, would not be justified in entertaining petitions for substantive review against orders issued under Section 11 of the Act for want of any enabling provision for review under the Act.
Faisal v. Regional Manager, Bank of Baroda
Banking Law -- When better benefits are available to the borrower, it is at the discretion of the borrower to avail financial assistance from any other Bank, so long as it does not violate any of the contractual terms or RBI Circular.
Sithara v. Sai Ram General Insurance Company Limited
Motor Vehicles Act 1988, S.166 -- In cases of motor vehicle accidents, the standard of proof required is that of preponderance of probabilities.
Catholic Congress v. Juby Thomas
Cinematograph Act 1952, S.5B -- Constitution of India, Art. 19(1)(a) -- The film must be judged by its overall message and not from isolated depictions of social evils and it need not comply strictly with religious requirements or be excessively moralising.
Cinematograph Act 1952, S.5B -- The scene where the heroine, a Christian girl wearing a Muslim attire and the interrogation of the hero by a police officer in the police station, in such circumstances, cannot be considered as indecent, immoral, contemptuous, affecting public order or affecting the morale of the police force as such.
Sajid Pasha v. Abdunnasir
Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, Ss. 21 & 11(5) -- Making a request under Section 21 of the Act is an essential pre-requisite under the scheme of the Act for approaching the Supreme Court or High Court as the case may be under Section 11(5) of the Act -- The arbitral proceedings commence when the request is received by the respondent.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, S.21 -- Though no particular form or ingredients are prescribed for a request under Section 21 of the Act, it must contain minimum particulars of the 'particular dispute' as mentioned in Section 21 of the Act.