Weekly Roundup (Aug 04 - Aug 09, 2025)
2025 (4) KLT 565 : 2025 KLT OnLine 2483
Susan Thomas v. State of Kerala
Companies Act 2013, S.248 -- When a company is dissolved or came to an end by operation of law, then also the offence committed by the company can be prosecuted, because striking off or dissolution does not erase liability of the company and in such cases the company has to be restored to the register.
2025 (4) KLT 574 : 2024 KLT OnLine 2818
Santhosh v. Kerala State Bevarages (Manufacturing and Marketing) Corporation Ltd
State Beverages (Manufacturing and Marketing) Corporation Limited Employees Service Rules 1986 (Kerala), Rr. 86 & 87 – The Managing Director of Kerala State Beverages (Manufacturing and Marketing) Corporation Limited can only seek to enforce the Service Rules (State Beverages (Manufacturing and Marketing) Corporation Limited Employees Service Rules, 1986 (Kerala)), and he cannot independently prescribe new methods for recovery.
2025 (4) KLT 583 : 2025 KLT OnLine 2363
Suhyb v. State of Kerala
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, Ss.218(1) & 223(2) -- Criminal P.C. 1973, S.197 & 197(1) -- The words ‘any offence alleged to have been committed in course of the discharge of his official functions or duties’ would take in an excessive act committed by such person in the course of the discharge of his official functions or duties
2025 (4) KLT 590 : 2025 KLT OnLine 2485
Sayyad v. State of Kerala
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, S.187(3) -- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, S.310(2) -- If the investigation relates to an offence which provides for a punishment of imprisonment for a term of ten years or more or imprisonment for life or with death, then the Magistrate is entitled to authorise detention upto ninety days.
2025 (4) KLT 594 : 2025 KLT OnLine 2492
Neyyattinkara Urban Co operative Bank Ltd. No.931 v. State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016 -- Banking Regulation Act 1949 – Co operative Societies Act 1969 (Kerala) – The State Commissioner for persons with Disabilities has no authority to issue a direction to the bank to appoint a physically disabled person in a permanent post of peon in the bank.
2025 (4) KLT 600 : 2025 KLT OnLine 2484
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. G and M Industrial Products
Redressal of Public Grievances Rules 1998, Rr. 4(i) & 13(2) -- Though nowhere in the Rules there is any express exclusion of complaints submitted other than by individuals, conjoint reading of the provisions gives the impression that the Rules were intended for redressal of grievances of individuals -- There is no indication in the Rules that adjudication of disputes arising from policies issued on commercial lines to entities like companies, partnership or other business establishments including proprietorship concerns by the Ombudsman was envisaged under the Rules.
2025 (4) KLT 608 : 2025 KLT OnLine 2488
Hari v. Shine Varghese
Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, Ss.139 & 138 -- There is no doubt to the fact that the presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act covers legally enforceable debt also.
2025 (4) KLT 625 : 2025 KLT OnLine 2496
Kerala Public Service Commission v. Krishnaprasad
Public Services Act 1968 (Kerala) – Constitution of India, Art.309 & Art.320 -- Public Service Commission Rules of Procedure 1976 (Kerala) -- Both the Government and the PSC have the authority to determine the sufficiency of the qualifications.
2025 (4) KLT 650 : 2025 KLT OnLine 2511
Padmaja Devi v. Vidhya
Electronic Filing Rules for Courts (Kerala) 2021, R. 13(2) -- The relevant date, as far as e-filing is concerned, is the date on which the action is electronically received in the Registry
2025 (4) KLT 651 : 2025 KLT OnLine 2521
Vimalchand Bokadia v. Regional Transport Officer
Motor Vehicles Act 1988, S. 51 & 51(1) -- Circular Nos.13/2011 dated 13.06.2011, 14/2011 dated 28.06.2011 and 19/2015 dated 22.07.2015 -- Under Section 51, there is no stipulation that entries in the certificate of registration under Section 51(1) can be made only if the financier is having a registration under any particular law.
2025 (4) KLT 663 (SC) : 2025 KLT OnLine 2490 (SC)
Bansal Milk Chilling Centre v. Rana Milk Food Private Ltd.
Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, S.138 -- Practice and Procedure -- It is fallacious to contend that in no circumstance can amendments to complaints be allowed after cognizance is taken.
2025 (4) KLT 670 : 2025 KLT OnLine 2471
Riyas v. State of Kerala
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, S.482 -- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, Ss.189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 110, 190 & 296(b) -- The fundamental right to have access to courts of law is enabled largely through Advocates -- If Advocates are attacked for drafting complaints rule of law will suffer.
2025 (4) KLT 672 (SC) : 2025 KLT OnLine 2487 (SC)
Satauram Mandavi v. State of Chhattisgarh
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012, S. 6 -- Constitution of India, Art. 20(1) -- Since the offence was committed on 20.05.2019, the amended provision of Section 6 of the POCSO Act, which came into force on 16.08.2019, could not have been applied -- The Constitutional bar against retrospective imposition of a harsher penalty under Article 20(1) is clear and absolute.
Thankamma v. Regional Joint Labour Commissioner
Payment of Gratuity Act 1972, S. 7(5) -- The provisions of Gratuity Act are self-contained and the provisions of CPC are applicable only to certain limited purpose of enquiry, as provided in Section 7(5) of the Payment of Gratuity Act -- Appeal preferred beyond the period of limitation, not maintainable.
Thykandy Rajan v. District Disaster Management Authority
Disaster Management Act 2005, S. 33 – The District authority can issue an order under Section 33 only to any officer or any Department at the District level or any local authority to take measures for the prevention or mitigation of disaster and not to an individual.
Subhulakshmi v. UCO Bank
Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 Ss. 13(2), 13(4) & 14 -- Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act 1965 (Kerala) S. 11 -- Transfer of Property Act 1882, Ss. 65A & 105 -- When Section 35 of the SARFAESI Act gives overriding effect to that Act on all other laws having inconsistent provisions, and Section 17(4-A) gives authority to the Debts Recovery Tribunal to examine whether a lease or a tenancy has expired or determined, then it is the Debts Recovery Tribunal to determine that question -- If the Tribunal finds that the lease is not lawful or has already terminated, then there is no necessity to relegate the parties to the proceedings under the Rent Control Act.
IL and FS Financial Services Ltd. v. Adhunik Meghalaya Steels Pvt. Ltd.
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016, Ss. 7 & 238A -- Limitation Act 1963, S. 18 -- As to whether a certain document in a given case constitutes a valid acknowledgement would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case.
Director General of Police v. Rajeswari
Motor Vehicles Act 1988, Ss.166 & 163A -- Res Ipsa Loquitur -- In a case of rolling out of the tyre from the vehicle and causing an accident, there is no necessity for any direct evidence to prove negligence on the part of the driver -- The negligence is clearly evident and proved.
Vinu C Kunjappan v. State of Kerala
Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act 1971, S. 2 & 2(a) -- Flag Code of India 2002, Part III S.III R.3.6 -- Unless there is a deliberate action with an intention to insult the national honour or show disrespect to the National Flag, the provisions of the Act of 1971 cannot be attracted -- In the absence of any intention on the part of the accused deliberately not lowering the National Flag after sunset, the said act cannot be said to be one showing insult or disrespect to the National Flag -- Flag Code, 2002 is not a law within the meaning of Article 13(3)(a) of the Constitution of India.
Umri Pooph Pratappur (UPP) Tollways Pvt. Ltd. v. M.P. Road Development Corporation
Highways Act 2004 (M.P.) -- Constitution of India, Art. 19(1)(g), Art. 21 & Art. 226 -- The contract for laying of a State Highway/District Road, when assigned by the Corporation owned and run by the government, assumes the character of a public function -- Even if performed by a private party - and would satisfy the functionality test to sustain the writ petition.
XXXX v. Abraham Mathai
Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act 2013, S. 3 -- Sexual harassment includes not only direct advances but also conduct that leverages power or workplace dynamics to control, influence, or intimidate a woman, provided such conduct occurs in relation to or is connected with any act or behaviour of sexual harassment.
Suresh v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Evidence Act 1872, Ss. 35 & 74 -- Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000, S. 2(35) -- Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules 2007, R. 12 -- Though the issue of juvenility, indubitably and primarily has to be determined as per the relevant provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act and the Rules framed thereunder, as applicable at the relevant time, yet under appropriate circumstances and with justifiable reasons, the Court examing the issue has the discretion to take other relevant materials and factors into account, for ultimately the cause of justice has to prevail.
Nidhi Jain v. Ankit Jain
Criminal P.C. 1973, S.311 -- The Court has wide discretion to summon, recall or re-examine witnesses at any stage of the proceedings to serve but, such power must be exercised with caution, fairness and judicial prudence so that it does not become an instrument of delay or abuse.
Dharvendra Pal Singh v. State of U.P.
Service -- Disciplinary enquiry -- A punishment order cannot be held invalid merely on the ground that it does not specifically mention the details of the show cause notice or the written reply submitted by the petitioner, if the substance of both is duly considered and discussed in the order -- Unless there is a manifest procedural irregularity or a clear illegality apparent on the face of the record, such minor omissions would not render the order unsustainable in the eyes of law.
Gajanan Dattatray Gore v. State of Maharashtra
Criminal P.C. 1973, Ss. 439 & 438 -- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, Ss.483 & 482 -- No Trial Court or any of the High Courts shall pass any order of grant of regular bail or anticipatory bail on any undertaking that the accused might be ready to furnish for the purpose of obtaining appropriate reliefs -- The High Courts as well as the Trial Courts shall decide the plea for regular bail or anticipatory bail strictly on the merits of the case -- The High Courts and the Trial Courts shall not exercise their discretion in this regard on any undertaking or any statement that the accused may be ready and willing to make.
Krishnagopal B. Nangpal v. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Special Range
Income Tax Act 1961, S. 54(1) -- Use of the words ‘a residential house’ in unamended Section 54 (1) of the Act would not mean a single residential house and the contemplated even multiple residential houses -- The emphasis in the unamended Section 54 (1) of the Act is on residential nature of the property and the objective was never to restrict the number of residential houses purchased against capital gains.
Delhi Pollution Control Committee v. Lodhi Property Co. Ltd.
Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974, S. 33A -- Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981, S. 31A -- Constitution of India, Art. 48A & Part IVA -- To ensure that the Boards impose restitutionary and the compensatory environmental damages in a fair transparent, non- arbitrary manner, with procedural certainty, necessary subordinate legislation in the form of rules and regulations must be notified.
M/s. Shikhar Chemicals v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Criminal P.C. 1973, S.482 – Penal Code 1860, S.420 – The stand taken by the High Court that criminal proceedings be instituted by the complainant in a case of pure civil dispute for it may take considerable time for the complainant to recover the balance amount by preferring a civil suit – Rebuked.
Ramachandran v. Salim
Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act 2008 (Kerala),S. 5 & 5(4) – Preparation of Data Bank – Role of District Collector or RDO -- While enacting the provisions of the Act, no powers have been contemplated by the Legislature that empower the District Collector or RDO to direct LLMC to include certain properties in the Data Bank.
Ch. Joseph v. Telangana State Road Transport Corporation
Service -- Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act 1995, S. 47 -- Constitution of India, Art. 14 & Art. 21 -- Beneficial and remedial legislation must not be diluted by narrow interpretation, and the protections offered therein must be extended purposively to protect the livelihood, dignity and service continuity of employees who acquire disabilities during employment.
Sivakumar v. Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau
Prevention of Corruption Act 1988, Ss.7, 13(1)(d) & 20 -- In so far as Section 7 of the Act is concerned, on the proof of the facts in issue, Section 20 mandates the court to raise a presumption that the illegal gratification was for the purpose of a motive or reward and the said presumption has to be raised by the court as a legal presumption or a presumption in law.
Board of Directors, Kozhippally Service Co-operative Bank Limited v. Joint Registrar of Co-operatives (General)
Co-operative Societies Act 1969 (Kerala), S. 65(1)(a), 65(1)(b), 65(1)(c), 65(1)(d), 65(1)(e) & 65(1)(f) – The responsibility of the Registrar while acting under Section 65(1)(a) is not greater than the responsibility in situations covered by Clauses (b) to (f) of Section 65(1).
Kerala Public Service Commission v. Sheethal
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016, Ss. 32, 33 & 34 - The legislature never intended the provisions of Section 32 to be used as a tool to deny the benefits of Section 33 to the categories of disabled persons indicated therein.
Co-operative Societies Act 1969 (Kerala), S. 65(1) -- It cannot be recognized as a legal requirement flowing from Section 65(1) that the Registrar should personally inspect, evaluate and assess all relevant records and documents maintained by the society, in order to arrive at a valid satisfaction as to the requirement of holding/authorising an inquiry under Section 65 of the Act.
Deepak Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh
Penal Code 1860, S.376 -- In cases of offences committed under Section 376, IPC, when the story of the victim girl as told in the evidence is found credit-worthy, the apparent insufficiency of medical evidence pitted against acceptable testimony of the victim, the latter would prevail.
Anas Mohammed v. State of Kerala
Penal Code 1860, S.294(b) – Utterance of abusive words in a moving private car -- It cannot be said that the private space inside the car where the accused allegedly uttered the abusive words, would come within the term of public place envisaged under Section 294(b) I.P.C.
Odisha State Financial Corporation v. Vigyan Chemical Industries
State Financial Corporations Act 1951, S. 29 -- Civil P.C. 1908, S. 47 -- At the stage of execution proceedings, objections regarding the maintainability of the suit as well as the jurisdiction of the trial Court can be raised for consideration, and the executing court is well within its powers to deal with such objections in accordance with law, if such objections, from the face of the records, do not require adjudication by trial.
M/s. PDMC Industries v. Ministry of Micro Small and Medium Enterprises
Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002, S. 13(2) -- Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act 2006 -- Classification of MSME Accounts as NPA -- Banks are mandatorily required to identify incipient stress and classify MSME accounts under the Special Mention Account (SMA) categories before declaring them as NPAs, provided the MSME furnishes authenticated and verifiable documents establishing its status under the MSMED Act.
Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002, Ss. 13(2), 13(4) & 17 -- Constitution of India Art.226 – The grievance of a borrower regarding asset classification and consequential invocation of the SARFAESI Act by issuing notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, cannot be redressed under section 17 of the SARFAESI Act in the absence of invocation of Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act and judicial review under Article 226 is the only remedy.
Jose v. Sub Inspector of Police
Criminal P.C. 1973, Ss.328 & 329 – The mere assessment as to whether the accused is having mental illness or not, by referring the matter to the Mental Health Review Board, would not serve any purpose, unless the opinion sought to be obtained is whether the unsoundness of mind of the accused is of such an extent which would render him incapable of making his defence.
Criminal P.C. 1973, Ss.328 & 329 – Mental Health Care Act 2017, S. 105 – A more comprehensive and scientific framework, when compared with Section 105 of Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, is provided under Sections 328 & 329 Cr.PC for the evaluation of the mental condition of the accused.
Shail Kumari v. State of Chhattisgarh
Penal Code 1860, S.302 -- The conviction under Section 302 could be sustainable only if the prosecution is in a position to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and also establish a chain of events which is so connected to each other that it leads to no other conclusion than the guilt of the accused.
Sabu Thomas v. Narayanan Namboothiri
Transfer of Property Act 1882, S. 55(6)(b) -- The charge under Section 55(6)(b) of the Transfer of Property Act is available even against a bona fide transferee for value from the seller.
Narayan Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh
Evidence Act 1872, Ss. 8, 21 & 27 -- An FIR of a confessional nature made by an accused person is inadmissible in evidence against him, except to the extent that it shows he made a statement soon after the offence, thereby identifying him as the maker of the report, which is admissible as evidence of his conduct and, any information furnished by him that leads to the discovery of a fact is admissible under Section 27 however, a non-confessional FIR is admissible against the accused as an admission under Section 21 and is relevant.
Jamnalal v. State of Rajasthan
Criminal P.C. 1973, S.389 -- While cancellation of bail is due to some supervening circumstances like breach of bail condition, setting aside of the bail is concerned not with the breach of condition but with the justifiability and soundness of the order granting bail.
Rajesh v. State of Kerala
Criminal Trial – Identification of accused in the dock – It is a settled law that the substantive evidence of identification is the identification of an accused in the dock -- Even if the case of the prosecution is that the witnesses are closely related or known to each other, the same will not suffice unless they positively identify the accused in the dock.
Suo Moto v. State of Kerala
Practice and procedure – Filing of two criminal appeals by the Convict one after the other by suppressing the dismissal of the first one – Directions issued to avoid such incidents in future -- Strict directions should be given by the Principal District Judge to his office to number all cases only after manually verifying that there are no earlier proceedings on the same issue.
Bhut v. High Court of Gujarat
Service -- Compulsory retirement -- A single uncommunicated adverse remark in the entire service record or doubtful integrity is enough to retire a Judicial Officer compulsory in public interest -- The compliance of principles of natural justice is not necessary.
Sudheesh A.T. v. Director of Mining and Geology Department
Environmental Law – Environment Protection Act 1986, S. 3(2)(v) – Environment Protection Rules 1986, R. 5 – National Parks and Wildlife sanctuaries – Ecological Sensitive Zone – For conducting Quarrying operations – O.M. Dt. 17.5.2022 -- Consideration by the Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife (SCNBWL) in terms of the O.M. dated 17.05.2022 cannot be insisted upon.
President Kizhakkambalam Grama Panchayath v. Superintendent of Police Ernakulam Rural
Panchayat Raj Act 1994 (Kerala), S.227 – Constitution of India Art.226 – Police protection – Act of mobocracy and vandalism If permitted, that will be the beginning of the end of our democratic system and rule of law -- The police authorities have to handle such situations with iron fist and enforce rule of law.
Aasif v. State of U.P
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012, Ss. 7 & 8 -- Penal Code 1860, Ss.354,354A,323 & 504 -- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, S. 3(1)(10) -- It is very important that the Court first look into the subject-matter, thereafter the court should look into the issue involved and lastly the court should look into the plea of the litigant and then proceed to apply the correct principles of law.
Sheeja v. Maintenance Appellate Tribunal/District Collector
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007, Ss. 2(g) & 4(4) – A person who is not a legal heir of the senior citizen cannot be a ‘relative’ under the Act merely for the reason that he is in possession of the property of the senior citizen or would inherit his property.
Bindhu v. State of Kerala
Prisons & Correctional Services (Management) Rules 2014, R.400(1)(i),400(1)(ii) & 400(1)(iii) – Constitution of India Art.226 – A convict is not entitled to emergency leave for giving care to his wife during the pregnancy.
National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Sunita Devi
Motor Vehicles Act 1988, Ss.147(5),149(1) & 166 --The liability of the insurance company vis-à-vis the third party in the eventuality of rescindment of the insurance contract on account of non-payment of premium because of bouncing of the cheque issued towards premium amount -- The Insurance Company has deposited the 50% amount of compensation with interest as awarded, the same is also released and the respondent-claimants have received them -- In larger interest of justice to all parties, no recovery deserves to be permitted for the said amount deposited and withdrawn from the claimants.
Kulwinder Kaur v. Parshant Sharma
Motor Vehicles Act 1988, S.166 – The deceased was national of United States and self-employed in that country -- To determine the just compensation to a person who died in an accident occurred in India, the dictum of law in Pranay Sethi (2017 (4) KLT 662 (SC)) shall have to be followed and applied specially when no material evidence is offered to determine the future prospects in the foreign country.
FICCI Multiplex Association of India v. State of Maharashtra
Entertainments Duty Act 1923 (Maharashtra), S.2(b) -- “Convenience fees” charged would squarely fall within section 2(b)(iv) which defines “payment of admission” and which forms the measure of tax on which rate of duty is to be paid under Section 3 of the MED Act.
Santhoshkumar v. State of Kerala
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, Ss.103(1),108 & 3(5) -- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, S.482 – Suicide Note – Abetment – The suicide note indicate certain demands made by some persons to clear liabilities due from the deceased -- That by itself cannot prima facie lead to the conclusion that accused had abetted the commission of suicide.
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, Ss.103(1),108 & 3(5) -- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, S.482 – Suicide Note – Abetment – The suicide note indicate certain demands made by some persons to clear liabilities due from the deceased -- That by itself cannot prima facie lead to the conclusion that accused had abetted the commission of suicide.
Elvin John Mathew v. State of Kerala
Arms Act 1959, S. 21(1) -- Arms Rules 2016, R. 24(2) – The expression ‘without unnecessary delay’ in Section 21(1) of the Act being vague, failure to deposit the arm immediately after expiry of the licence cannot result in the licencee being compelled to face criminal prosecution.