Latest news with #Kunhikrishnan
The Hindu
4 days ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Kerala High Court imposes ₹50,000-fine on litigant
The Kerala High Court has imposed a fine of ₹50,000 on a litigant, who appeared as party-in-person in a case, for allegedly threatening the judge who was hearing his case. The litigant reportedly said that he had filed a complaint against the judge before the President of India and the other authorities. While imposing the fine amount, a Single Bench of Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan observed that he was discharging his duty in accordance with the Constitution of India, and that he was not bothered about such threats. He added that he was exercising his judicial powers in accordance with the law and the Constitution. Such litigants who appear in person must be familiar with the basics of courtroom decorum and must also know the consequences of making unnecessary submissions even after a warning, the judge said. The same litigant had earlier been warned by the court for allegedly attempting to engage in 'forum shopping', after he asked the court to avoid his case. He had also engaged in similar behaviour before other High Court Benches as well.
The Hindu
08-08-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
Kerala HC denies life convict's plea for emergency parole
Stating that parole cannot be granted to convicts sentenced in serious cases by invoking the extraordinary powers of the court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Kerala High Court has denied emergency leave to a life convict, who was convicted of murder, to provide 'pregnancy care' to his wife. A Bench of Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan observed that while granting emergency leave by invoking its extraordinary jurisdiction, the court must always keep in mind the interests of the victims and their relatives. Their kith and kin might have been murdered after sustaining fatal injuries. No court can grant parole to convicts sentenced in serious cases by forgetting the victims and invoking the extraordinary powers of this court. The court will always try to balance interests of victims and basic needs of convicts. Emergency parole, as per the Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Rules, 2014, is to be granted only on rare occasions. Most of the fundamental rights of convicts are suspended once they are convicted and sent to prison. These rights cannot be diluted by granting emergency leave on a regular basis, except in truly extraordinary circumstances, the court observed.
New Indian Express
01-08-2025
- General
- New Indian Express
'Duty, not charity': Kerala HC slams man for denying maintenance to 100-year-old mother
KOCHI: The Kerala High Court has come to the aid of a 100-year-old woman seeking maintenance from one of her sons by upholding a family court order directing him to pay Rs 2,000 per month to her. Justice P V Kunhikrishnan also slammed the 57-year-old son, saying that if he fails to take care of his mother, he should be "ashamed of himself". "It is the duty of every son to look after his mother. It is not a charity," the court said and dismissed the man's appeal against the family court order of April 2022. The High Court noted that the man challenged the April 2022 order of the family court after a delay of 1,149 days, in 2025, after recovery proceedings were initiated against him for not paying the maintenance amount. "At the time of filing the petition (in the family court), the mother of the petitioner was 92, and now she is aged 100 and waiting for the maintenance from her son! I am forced to say that, I feel deeply ashamed, being a member of this society, where a son is fighting with his mother, aged 100, merely to deny her a monthly maintenance of Rs 2,000," Justice Kunhikrishnan said. The son had opposed the plea moved by his mother in the family court, seeking Rs 5,000 as monthly maintenance from him, claiming that she did not require such an amount and that he would take care of her if she stayed with him.
News18
01-08-2025
- General
- News18
Kerala HC slams man for denying maintenance to 100-year-old mother
Kochi, Aug 1 (PTI) The Kerala High Court has come to the aid of a 100-year-old woman seeking maintenance from one of her sons by upholding a family court order directing him to pay Rs 2,000 per month to her. Justice P V Kunhikrishnan also slammed the 57-year-old son, saying that if he fails to take care of his mother, he should be 'ashamed of himself". 'It is the duty of every son to look after his mother. It is not a charity," the court said and dismissed the man's appeal against the family court order of April 2022. The High Court noted that the man challenged the April 2022 order of the family court after a delay of 1,149 days, in 2025, after recovery proceedings were initiated against him for not paying the maintenance amount. 'At the time of filing the petition (in the family court), the mother of the petitioner was 92, and now she is aged 100 and waiting for the maintenance from her son! I am forced to say that, I feel deeply ashamed, being a member of this society, where a son is fighting with his mother, aged 100, merely to deny her a monthly maintenance of Rs 2,000," Justice Kunhikrishnan said. The son had opposed the plea moved by his mother in the family court, seeking Rs 5,000 as monthly maintenance from him, claiming that she did not require such an amount and that he would take care of her if she stayed with him. He had also claimed that his mother had other children who were not taking care of her and the plea in the family court was filed at the insistence of his elder brother, with whom she was currently living. The High Court said it was 'sad" to see that the son was not ready to take care of his mother and was fighting in court to deny maintenance to her by raising different contentions. It said that the petitioner ought to have avoided the situation in which his mother had to move a court to seek maintenance. It further said it was the petitioner's duty to look after his mother, and if he was not doing so, he was 'not a human being". 'A son is indebted to his parents in so many ways, and it is the duty of the son to serve his parents. A mother is her son's home base. Even when he grows up and has a new woman in his life, and gets a new home, he is still her son. No matter your age, you will always need your mother. 'Despite the profound bond between a mother and her son, when the son gets married and starts his own family, he often forgets that his mother still needs him in her life. It takes so little effort to call our mothers, yet we often forget that just hearing our voice can make their day," the High Court said. It further pointed out that when the parents grow old, their tastes, attitudes and temperaments may differ. 'There will be childish habits in all people when they become old. We should remember that when we were children, our mother showed patience with us, even when we became impatient or upset over simple matters. 'In the same way, when they become old, we should be patient with them. Old people may show childish stubbornness, and therefore it is the duty of the children to calm them down with understanding and patience. The success of the children depends on that," it said. PTI HMP HMP ADB view comments First Published: August 01, 2025, 18:15 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
News18
25-07-2025
- Politics
- News18
Debt by cash transactions of over Rs 20,000 not legally enforceable: Kerala HC
Kochi, Jul 25 (PTI) The Kerala High Court on Friday declared that a debt created by a cash transaction of above Rs 20,000 in violation of the Income Tax Act is not a 'legally enforceable debt" unless there is a valid explanation for the same. Justice P V Kunhikrishnan made the declaration while allowing a plea for setting aside the conviction and sentence of a man accused in a cheque dishonor case. The accused was sentenced to one year and imposed with a fine of Rs 9 lakh by a sessions court for the offence of dishonour of cheque due to insufficiency of funds in the account under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments (NI) Act. In his appeal in the High Court against the sessions court decision, the accused claimed that as the amount of Rs 9 lakh given to him by the complainant was in cash, it was an illegal transaction according to the Income Tax laws. 'Therefore, a debt created by an illegal transaction cannot be treated as a legally enforceable debt," the accused had claimed. Agreeing with the accused's contention, Justice Kunhikrishnan said that if a criminal court 'indirectly legalises such illegal transactions in violation of the IT Act" by treating them as a legally enforceable debt, it will be against the aim of the country to discourage cash transactions above Rs 20,000. The High Court said that discouraging cash transactions above Rs 20,000 was also 'a part of the 'digital India' dream of our country, which is propounded by our Prime Minister to save our economy and to curb a parallel economy in our country". 'If the debt arises through an illegal transaction, that debt cannot be treated as a legally enforceable debt. If the court regularises such transactions, that will encourage illegal transactions by the citizens. Even black money will be converted into white money through the criminal courts," the High Court said. It further said that in such cases the accused should challenge such transactions in evidence and has to rebut the presumption under section 139 of the NI Act that 'the holder of a cheque received it for the discharge of a debt or other liability". In the instant case, the accused had rebutted the presumption by claiming that the complainant does not have the source to loan out Rs 9 lakh and therefore, the debt alleged to be due to him cannot be treated as a legally enforceable one, the HC said. It allowed the accused's revision petition and acquitted him by setting aside his conviction and sentence by the lower court. The High Court said if anybody pays an amount in excess of Rs 20,000 to another person by cash in violation of the IT Act and thereafter receives a cheque for that debt, he should take responsibility to get back the amount, unless there is a valid explanation for such cash transactions. 'If there is no valid explanation in tune with provisions of the IT Act, the doors of the criminal court will be closed for such illegal transactions," the HC said. It also made it clear that its findings would be prospective in nature. PTI HMP HMP ROH view comments First Published: July 25, 2025, 18:00 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
