Latest news with #KeralaHighCourt
News18
9 hours ago
- General
- News18
Widow Can't Be Thrown Out Of Matrimonial Home By In-Laws: Kerala High Court
Last Updated: A 41-year-old woman approached the courts seeking protection from harassment and forceful eviction from the shared household after her husband's demise in 2009 The Kerala High Court recently upheld a widow's right to reside in her matrimonial home, rejecting objections raised by her in-laws, who had attempted to evict her. The bench of Justice MB Snehalatha dismissed a revision petition filed by the relatives of the deceased husband of a 41-year-old woman who had approached the courts seeking protection from harassment and forceful eviction from the shared household after her husband's demise in 2009. The high court affirmed the decision of the sessions court in Palakkad, which had granted protection and residence orders in the woman's favour after overturning the findings of the judicial magistrate, who had initially dismissed her plea. The woman alleged that following her husband's death, her in-laws began to harass her and obstruct her and her children's entry into the family home. She approached the court under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. However, the magistrate's court held that she had no existing 'domestic relationship" with her in-laws and therefore wasn't entitled to relief under the Act. The sessions court took a different view and granted her the relief sought. The in-laws challenged this before the high court, arguing that the woman owned separate property and had been living at her parental home, thus disqualifying her as an 'aggrieved person" under the Act. Rejecting these arguments, the high court noted that the woman, being the wife of the deceased and having resided in the shared household, fell squarely within the definitions under Sections 2(a), 2(f), and 2(s) of the DV Act. The court reiterated that the right to reside in the shared household does not depend on ownership or continuous residence at the time of the dispute. Quoting extensively from the Supreme Court's 2022 ruling in Prabha Tyagi vs Kamlesh Devi, the judgment emphasised that women's right to shelter and security within a domestic setting is fundamental and cannot be undermined merely because they possess alternate accommodation or temporarily reside elsewhere. 'This right is crucial for a woman's safety and dignity, ensuring that she is not forcibly removed or homeless due to domestic abuse," the court observed, while also stressing that the DV Act should be interpreted liberally in favour of victims, keeping its beneficial and protective purpose in mind. Finding no merit in the arguments of the in-laws, the high court refused to interfere with the sessions court order. The revision petition was, accordingly, dismissed. First Published: June 04, 2025, 16:26 IST
The Hindu
14 hours ago
- General
- The Hindu
Family of youngster missing for almost a year ago moves Kerala HC for CBI probe
The family of Adam Jo Antony, a youngster from Palluruthy who went missing hardly a fortnight before his 20th birthday, has moved the Kerala High Court demanding a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into his mysterious disappearance after the Kerala Police failed to make a breakthrough in the case almost a year after. Jo had gone for his routine early morning cycling on July 28, 2024. CCTV footage from his immediate neighbourhood showed Jo on the road at 3.19 a.m. on the day he went missing. Thereafter, he was untraceable. He had neither taken his wallet nor his mobile phone, which made tracking him by tower location impossible. 'Our demand for a CBI probe is not out of our dissatisfaction over the police probe. They are indeed investigating and keeping us informed. But it is now 312 days since he went missing, and there is no hint of where he is or what happened to him,' said K.J. Antony, Jo's father. He filed a habeas corpus petition in the Kerala High Court, urging the police to produce his son in November 2024. The latest hearing was held on Tuesday (June 03, 2025). After the initial probe by the local police made little headway, District Police Chief (Kochi City) Putta Vimaladitya formed a Special Investigation Team headed by the Mattancherry Assistant Commissioner in September 2024. Later, another team led by the Deputy Commissioner was put in charge of the probe following the habeas corpus petition. The police have been submitting fortnightly reports to the court since then. The police have also been coordinating with their counterparts in other States like Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Delhi, and even Himachal Pradesh. Police teams going to other States to investigate other cases are also being asked to take up this missing case with the local police there. Besides, the police have been to places within and outside Kerala that Jo had visited before he went missing. Spots where he could have likely abandoned his cycle or sold it have also been covered. The police are also in touch with Malayali associations in other States. The possibility of the youngster working somewhere incognito and the identity of victims involved in accidents or mishaps is also looked into. The incident has taken a heavy toll on the youngster's family, not the least on his 14-year-old younger sibling.
New Indian Express
2 days ago
- New Indian Express
Court orders police probe into illegal road digging in Kochi
KOCHI: The Ernakulam First Class Judicial Magistrate Court has directed the police to register a case and conduct a probe against those responsible for illegally digging up and damaging public roads in the Palarivattom area. The directive was issued based on a complaint filed by Advocate Firdous Ammanath. In his complaint, Firdous alleged roads were unlawfully dug up for laying pipelines and gas lines without proper permission from city corporation, causing significant damage. When he approached the Palarivattom police, they allegedly refused to register a case, after which he moved court, Firdous said. After the petition was filed, the police submitted a report in court confirming that the roads in question were dug up without obtaining any official sanction. The police also said that an investigation was necessary to identify the culprits and collect evidence, after which appropriate action will be taken. The court then issued the order to begin an investigation. Firdous said the offence falls under the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act. He said the PJ Antony Road in Palarivattom, Mahakavi Vyloppilly Road, Nandanath Kochacko Road and Thammanam-Pullepady Road were all constructed as per BMBC standards, and hence, must be restored accordingly. However, the restoration in many areas was substandard, often involving poor-quality concrete work, which he alleged was illegal. The Palarivattom police will register an FIR upon getting the court order. 'After the police file the FIR, I will approach the Kerala High Court about other roads in Kochi being dug up in a similar fashion,' Firdous alleged.
Hans India
2 days ago
- Hans India
Kerala HC gives ED official interim protection from arrest
In an interim order, the Kerala High Court on Monday barred the arrest of the Enforcement Directorate's Assistant Director in Kochi, Sekhar Kumar, till June 11. Trouble started for Kumar last month when the Kerala Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) registered a First Information Report (FIR) naming him as the first accused in a high-profile alleged corruption case in which three arrests have already been made. The VACB had arrested three people - chartered accountant Ranjith Warrier, middleman Wilson, and Rajasthan resident Mukesh Jain, who has been settled in Kochi for a long time. The case revolves around a Kollam-based businessman engaged in cashew exports to an African country, who reportedly suffered significant financial losses during the Covid-19 pandemic after being defrauded by a foreign client. This led to an investigation by the ED, during which the businessman was issued a summons. Around this time, Wilson allegedly approached the businessman, claiming he had influential contacts within the ED and could help him "settle" the case. Wilson demanded Rs 2 crore to be paid in four equal instalments, promising that the ED inquiry would be dropped. Shortly thereafter, the businessman received a second ED summons -- just as Wilson had predicted, leading him to get suspicious. When Wilson later asked for Rs 2 lakh in cash, the businessman alerted VACB officials. To establish evidence, the businessman was advised to hand over the cash and also make a bank transfer, enabling the officials to track the money trail. Wilson was caught red-handed while collecting the cash and was taken into custody. Later, the VACB officials arrested Jain and Warrier. It was at this time that Kumar moved an anticipatory bail at the High Court. In his petition, he said that he has done no wrong, has nothing to do with the so-called corruption case and with the three people who were arrested. He also added that he fears arrest and seeks bail and is agreeable to any conditions put forward by the court. The Court will now hear the petition on June 11. Meanwhile, the VACB team on Monday evening arrived at the Kochi office of the ED to collect more information in the case.
The Hindu
2 days ago
- The Hindu
Kerala HC orders Vigilance not to arrest ED officer till June 11
The Kerala High Court on Monday ordered the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) not to arrest till June 11 Sekhar Kumar, Assistant Director of the Enforcement Directorate (ED), Kochi, in connection with a case relating to the alleged demand of ₹2 crore as bribe from a Kollam-based cashew businessman to save him from a money laundering case. The court passed the interim order when an anticipatory bail petition filed by the ED officers came up for hearing. Director General of Prosecution T.A. Shaji submitted that the petitioner would not be arrested till June 6. The submission was recorded by the court. 'Ulterior motive' According to the petitioner, he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case with ulterior motives. The attempt of the businessman is to somehow wriggle out of the prosecution initiated against him by the Enforcement Directorate for siphoning off ₹24 lakh. The petitioner pointed out that the businessman had failed to cooperate with the ED investigation and skipped multiple summons in the money laundering case registered against him. He had filed the Vigilance case to escape legal action against himself.
