The Kerala High Court granted interim protection from arrest to the producers of the Malayalam film Manjummel Boys in a cheating case regarding the production of the film.

The petitioners received a notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, summoning them to the police station following allegations under IPC Sections 120B, 34, 406, 420, and 468.

The case involves claims of non-payment of promised profits as per the terms of their investment agreement. The Court allowed the producers time to appear before the police and posted the matter for further hearing on June 26. 

A prior anticipatory bail plea had been rejected after their quashing petition failed.

The Kerala High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of the Kerala Clinical Establishments (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2018, which requires hospitals to display fees charged for every clinical establishment for its services.

The Indian Medical Association and other associations had challenged Sections 25 and 39 of the Act, alleging excessive delegation and violation of rights.

Justice Harisankar V. Menon rejected these arguments, cited the Sabu P. Joseph case and held that the law is patient-centric and ensures transparency. 

The Court stressed that the legislation does not infringe on fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 21 and promotes accountability in clinical establishments through due process.

The Kerala High Court held that police cannot intrude into a person’s residence at odd hours under the pretext of surveillance, reaffirming that such acts violate the right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The Court stated that even history sheeters enjoy constitutional protections, and Kerala Police Manual allows only 'informal watching' or 'close watch,' not midnight doorstep confrontations .

The petitioner, who was previously acquitted in a POCSO case, faced a 1:30 am police visit, alleged harassment, and retaliatory action.

The Court ruled that such conduct lacked lawful authority under Section 39 of the Kerala Police Act and quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against him. (Prasath C v. State of Kerala & Anr.)

The Kerala High Court has held that a master’s degree from IGNOU, a UGC-recognised central university, is valid for the State Eligibility Test (SET) and does not require an additional equivalency certificate. 

The case involved S. Harisankar, whose SET certificate was withheld due to a lack of a state equivalency certificate despite passing the exam in July 2021.

The Court held that insisting on such certificates “would be the end of the education system” and struck down Clauses 2.2 & 5.6(a) of the SET prospectus as ultra vires. 

The LBS Centre for Science and Technology was directed to issue the SET certificate immediately. (Harisankar S. v. State of Kerala & Ors.)

The Kerala High Court ruled that no separate cancellation notice is needed if an insurance policy is cancelled immediately due to non-payment of premium, and the insured is aware.

In a fatal accident case, the insurer showed that the policy was cancelled on the same day and never delivered. The Court held that since the policy never reached the insured, they were deemed aware of the cancellation, and notice was unnecessary.

The court set aside the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal’s compensation award of ₹42.34 lakh against the insurer, holding the registered vehicle owner solely liable for the accident. 

The Kerala High Court has revived a plea filed by Kerala Yukthi Vadi Sanghom seeking legislation to prohibit black magic, sorcery, and inhuman rituals.

The petition, revived after earlier dismissal due to non-appearance of the petitioner, was prompted by ritual-related deaths in Pathanamthitta (2022) and Kottayam–Thiruvananthapuram (2024), and references that the Kerala Law Reforms Commission’s 2019 draft bill should be implemented. 

A Division Bench directed the State to file an affidavit by June 24, clarifying whether the proposed legislation is still under consideration. The plea urges adoption of a law akin to those in Maharashtra and Karnataka and seeks broader safeguards against superstitious practices.

The Kerala High Court quashed a criminal case against an 80-year-old pediatrician accused of sexual harassment under the POCSO Act and IPC Section 354A(1)(i).

The Court held that medical examinations conducted with parental consent and in the presence of family members fall under the protection of Section 41 of the POCSO Act, which excludes acts done in good faith for the child’s welfare.

The court found no sexual intent in the doctor's actions, noting the doctor conducted standard clinical procedures to address the minor’s chest and abdominal pain in the presence of the minor’s mother and sister. The charges were deemed unjustified and lacking a legal basis.

The Kerala High Court quashed the Bar Council of Kerala’s (BCK) disciplinary notice against KHCAA President Yeshwanth Shenoy, which was issued under Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961, over a courtroom exchange with a former judge.

Shenoy challenged the notice, alleging it was based on a judge's letter and unverified media reports, and that details of a contempt case were improperly leaked. 

The division bench found merit in his appeal and nullified the proceedings. However, a separate BCK disciplinary action against Shenoy related to a social media post remains pending before the Council.

The Kerala High Court ruled that principles of natural justice apply to orders issued by the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (‘FRRO’) restricting a foreigner's movement under the Foreigners Act.

The Court stated that while a pre-decisional hearing may be bypassed in cases involving national security or public interest, a post-decisional hearing is mandatory where such concerns are absent.

The ruling came in a case involving three Nepali citizens confined by the FRRO despite getting bail. The court found the FRRO’s action illegal due to the denial of a hearing and directed a fresh order.

The court emphasised that even foreign nationals are entitled to minimal procedural safeguards under Article 21 in non-emergency cases. 

A commercial court in Kerala has imposed a ₹1 crore fine on private dairy firm 'Milnna' for infringing the registered trademark and trade dress of 'Milma', owned by the Kerala Co-operative Milk Marketing Federation.

The Court held that 'Milnna' was deceptively similar to 'Milma', violating the plaintiff’s rights under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958.

The Court restrained the defendant from selling or advertising similarly branded products resembling Milma, noting they unjustly profited from Milma's goodwill.

The Court also directed the defendant to pay an additional Rs 8.81 L in litigation costs and upheld Milma’s proprietary rights. (The Kerala Co-operative Milk Marketing Federation Limited v. Jose George)

A 40-year-old woman named Raseena from Kannur, Kerala, died by suicide after allegedly being publicly humiliated by a group of men for speaking to a male friend.

Police reported that three members of the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI) confronted her and her friend, insulted her in front of her family, and subjected her friend to a “mob trial," detaining him and seizing his devices.

A suicide note cited humiliation as the reason for her death. The three accused have been arrested and remanded in custody, with police investigating the involvement of others. 

The Kerala High Court ruled that the registrar of marriages cannot cancel a marriage certificate unless it is shown that the registration was obtained fraudulently or improperly. 

The decision came in the case of a Muslim man and a Hindu woman who registered their marriage under the Special Marriage Act in 2014, later seeking its cancellation, alleging improper solemnisation.

The registrar denied the request under Rule 13 of the Kerala Registration of Marriages (Common) Rules, 2008. The Court found no evidence of fraud and noted that registrars can only verify solemnisation based on declarations and documents, not to determine their legal validity.

The court upheld the registrar’s rejection and advised the petitioners to seek relief in the civil court. 

The Kerala High Court has directed the Managing Director of the Kerala Water Authority (KWA) to convene a meeting with officials and resolve the long-standing drinking water shortage affecting over ten panchayats in Thrissur District. 

The Court noted that interim arrangements like alternate-day tanker supply under the Jal Jeevan Mission have continued for over two years despite an earlier court-mandated permanent solution. 

The Court noted the inefficiency of continued alternate-day water provision and warned that time-bound directives may follow unless decisive action is taken. The issue surfaced through two PILs filed in 2023 and 2025.

The next hearing is scheduled for June 26.

The Kerala High Court has issued notice to the Central government, Consortium of NLUs, UGC, and BCI in a petition filed by three CLAT PG 2025 candidates contesting the fee structure for admission counselling. 

Petitioners argued that the ₹30,000 (general) and ₹20,000 (reserved categories) counselling registration fee, along with a non-refundable ₹20,000 confirmation fee, violates Article 14 by creating an unfair financial barrier. 

They contend the charges lack transparency, disproportionately burden economically weaker students, and violate UGC’s Refund Policy for 2024–25. The petition seeks cancellation of these fees and a full refund if admission is not secured.

The Court has listed the matter for further hearing on July 22.