Skip to content

Judgments

8 judgments match your search. Search by party name, citation (e.g. LOK 2026 (10) Ker. 5), case number, judge or words in the judgment, or pick a date of decision.

Clear

LOK 2026 (11) Ker. 56 · High Court of Kerala

Ummer v. Station House Officer

Equivalent citations: 2026 KER 85738

SubjectCriminal Law, POCSO
JudgesJustice Raja Vijayaraghavan V, Justice K.V. Jayakumar
ActsProtection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (Sections 7, 8, 9 and 10); Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Section 482); Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Section 528); Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 354A)

POCSO proceedings cannot ordinarily be quashed solely on a settlement or on the victim’s no-objection affidavit after attaining majority, even for offences of lesser gravity; the inherent power remains for proceedings that are frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process.

LOK 2026 (11) Ker. 54 · High Court of Kerala

Biju @ Koodali Biju v. State of Kerala

Equivalent citations: 2026 KER 85379

SubjectCriminal Law, NDPS
JudgesJustice A. Badharudeen
ActsNarcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Sections 20(b)(ii)(B), 42(2) and 57)

Drawing samples after mixing ganja from two identical packets caused no prejudice, and one packet alone was an intermediate quantity; the conviction of the rider and the fleeing pillion rider was confirmed and the sentence modified to four years.

LOK 2026 (11) Ker. 53 · High Court of Kerala

Soumi Yoosuf v. Union of India

Equivalent citations: 2026 KER 84734

SubjectNDPS, Preventive Detention
JudgesJustice Soumen Sen, C.J., Justice Syam Kumar V.M
ActsPrevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (Sections 3(1), 3(2), 9(b), 9(c), 10, 11 and 12); Constitution of India (Article 22(5))

A PITNDPS detention order was quashed for unexplained delay that snapped the live link, the absence of reasons for the maximum two-year period, and reliance on a co-accused’s confession, though the statutory timelines and supply of documents were complied with.

LOK 2026 (11) Ker. 52 · High Court of Kerala

Sajeena U. v. State of Kerala

Equivalent citations: 2026 KER 84449

SubjectService Law
JudgesJustice Anil K. Narendran, Justice Muralee Krishna S
ActsConstitution of India (Article 227); Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (Section 19); Special Rules for the Kerala Secretariat Subordinate Service (Rules 4, 8 and 9)

The 40% cut-off for by-transfer appointment of Legal Assistants Gr.II, fixed by Government order when the Special Rules were silent and notified before selection began, was upheld; the challenge under Article 227 to the Tribunal’s order was dismissed.

LOK 2026 (11) Ker. 51 · High Court of Kerala

V.G. Balanchandraji v. State of Kerala

Equivalent citations: 2026 KER 84870

SubjectCriminal Law, Prevention of Corruption
JudgesJustice A. Badharudeen
ActsPrevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Sections 7, 13(1)(d), 13(2) and 20)

Bribe money placed in the measurement book at the accused’s direction proved demand and acceptance despite a negative phenolphthalein test on his hands; conviction of the Panchayat Assistant Engineer under the PC Act confirmed, with the sentence reduced to the one-year minimum.

LOK 2026 (11) SC 5 · Supreme Court of India

G. Pazhanivel v. S. Thilagavathy

Equivalent citations: 2026 INSC 1197

SubjectCivil Law
JudgesJustice Ujjal Bhuyan, Justice Atul S. Chandurkar
ActsCode of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Order IV Rule 2; Order VII Rules 11 and 13; Sections 2(2) and 122

The plaintiff alleged that a registered sale deed secured a loan and sought declaration of title, injunction, redemption and reconveyance. The courts below failed to consider the plaint as a whole. The possibility that the plaintiff might ultimately fail at trial did not justify rejection…

LOK 2026 (11) SC 52 · Supreme Court of India

Sujit Das v. Union of India

Equivalent citations: 2026 INSC 1195

SubjectConstitution
JudgesJustice Ujjal Bhuyan, Justice Atul S. Chandurkar
ActsConstitution of India — Article 22(2) — BNSS, 2023 — Section 58

The 24-hour period begins when the person’s liberty is actually curtailed. Only the time necessary for the journey to the Magistrate may be excluded. Continued detention beyond that period requires immediate release. Even detention within 24 hours must not exceed a reasonable period under Section…

LOK 2026 (11) SC 53 · Supreme Court of India

Kamalbai Waman Patil v. State of Maharashtra

Equivalent citations: 2026 INSC 1196

SubjectCriminal Law
JudgesJustice Ujjal Bhuyan, Justice Atul S. Chandurkar
ActsCode of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 386(a) — Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 106

The Sessions Court acquitted the appellant after considering inconsistencies between three dying declarations. The High Court reversed the acquittal and convicted her of murder. The Supreme Court held that the Sessions Court’s view was neither perverse nor illegal and that the High Court had accepted…