Civil Revision – Police Assistance to Implement Interim Injunction – Section 151 CPC – Application Allowed - The petitioner challenged the trial court’s order granting police help to enforce an interim injunction where the possession of the disputed property was contested – The High Court held that police assistance cannot be granted mechanically under Section 151 without a clear determination of possession rights, especially when possession was lost before the injunction extension and rival claims exist – Held: Order for police help set aside, direction issued for keys to be returned to petitioner, with liberty to trial court to decide injunction application after hearing both parties [Paras 1-62].

Possession Rights and Police Intervention – Interim Injunction Not Equivalent to Declaration of Rights – Ad-interim orders do not conclusively determine possession rights – High Court held that police cannot assist in restoring possession based on ex parte interim orders when the party seeking assistance is admittedly dispossessed prior to order extension – Held: Interim orders must be enforced carefully, courts must be cautious while exercising inherent powers [Paras 33-36, 45-58].

Inherent Powers of Court – Section 151 CPC – Scope and Limitation – Reaffirmed that inherent power under Section 151 is not to be used when specific provisions like Order 39 Rule 2A exist and when there is no unambiguous finding of possession violation – Reliance placed on Joydeb Das vs. Khandubala Das (2012), Gouri Das vs. Nani Bhattacharjee (2020), and other precedents – Held: Trial court erred by passing police help order solely on complainant’s version without inquiry or adjudication [Paras 26-48].

Direction on Future Proceedings – Adjudication Ordered - Trial court directed to decide pending injunction application after granting petitioner full opportunity to file objections and lead evidence – High Court clarified decision should be made uninfluenced by the interim order on police intervention [Paras 62].

Decision – Civil Revision Allowed – Police help order set aside, possession restored to petitioner, trial court directed to adjudicate matter afresh – Costs not awarded [Paras 59-63].

Criminal Law - Anticipatory Bail – Civil Dispute Escalated to Criminal Litigation – Supreme Court Orders Executed – Conditional Bail Granted – Petitioners involved in property dispute culminating before Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 27400 of 2023 sought pre-arrest bail in cross criminal cases registered under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita alleging mutual criminal trespass and violence after property possession was delivered pursuant to Supreme Court orders – Held: Pre-arrest bail granted to petitioners in Cr.P.Nos.5730/2025 and 5860/2025 as there was no prima facie evidence of direct involvement, but rejected for petitioner in Cr.P.No.5861/2025 (A1) in view of previous criminal antecedents, credible allegations of criminal conduct, and statements implicating him in engaging antisocial elements – Court considered the principles laid down in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (2020) 5 SCC 1 regarding grant of anticipatory bail and the nature of allegations – Custodial interrogation held necessary for certain accused, pre-arrest bail allowed/disallowed accordingly [Paras 16-34].

Criminal Law - Acquittal of Accused – Allegations of Sexual Assault under Section 8 POCSO Act and Sections 451, 506 IPC – Acquittal Upheld - The appeal by the State challenged the judgment acquitting the respondent accused of charges of sexual assault and house trespass based on contradictions in prosecutrix’s statements – The High Court, after reappreciating the evidence, affirmed the trial court’s finding that the prosecutrix’s inconsistent versions, lack of corroboration, and absence of medical evidence rendered the prosecution case unreliable – Held: Trial court’s judgment justified; State’s appeal dismissed [Paras 1-43].

Inconsistent Testimony – Variations in Statements of Prosecutrix – Evidence Found Unreliable - The Court found material inconsistencies between the prosecutrix’s FIR statement, Section 164 CrPC statement, and court testimony regarding the nature of assault and sequence of events – Held: Unexplained contradictions raised serious doubt about veracity of allegations; benefit of doubt rightly granted to accused [Paras 22-26, 34].

Lack of Medical and Corroborative Evidence – No Injuries Found – Prosecution Version Weakened - Absence of external or internal injuries on prosecutrix and absence of injuries on accused contradicted claims of physical assault and struggle – MLC records did not support prosecution’s case – Held: Lack of corroborative evidence a significant factor in affirming acquittal [Paras 16, 29-30].

House Trespass Not Established – Section 451 IPC Not Attracted – Voluntary Opening of Door by Prosecutrix - The Court noted that the prosecutrix herself opened the door to the accused and thus the offence of house trespass was not made out – Held: Essential ingredients of Section 451 IPC absent; acquittal correct [Paras 36].

Criminal Intimidation – Section 506 IPC – Intention to Cause Alarm Not Proved – The alleged threats were not proven to be intended to cause alarm or coerce prosecutrix - Held: Mere use of threats without intention to cause alarm insufficient to attract Section 506 IPC [Paras 37-42].

Final Decision – Appeal Dismissed – Acquittal Confirmed – No Substantial Error Found - The High Court upheld the trial court’s conclusion that prosecution failed to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt – Held: State’s appeal devoid of merit and dismissed [Para 43].

Civil Law - Negligence – Electrocution Death – Damages - Liability under Fatal Accidents Act – Appeal Allowed – The appellants, legal heirs of deceased Naresh Kumar, sought damages for his death caused by electrocution from a live electric wire on a pole, alleging negligence on part of the electricity board in maintaining safety of electric lines – The Trial Court granted ₹2 lakhs as damages but the First Appellate Court reversed the decree citing lack of conclusive evidence and attributing contributory negligence to the deceased – The High Court, on appreciation of witness testimony, postmortem and viscera reports, held that death was due to electrocution caused by negligent maintenance of electric wires – The absence of burn marks was held not decisive against electrocution in light of medical jurisprudence – No contributory negligence was found on part of the deceased – Held: The electricity department is responsible to ensure public safety, and the First Appellate Court erred in reversing the decree – The judgment of the First Appellate Court is set aside and the Trial Court decree is restored, awarding compensation to the appellants [Paras 4-15].

Taxation Law – Recovery of Tax - GST Liability – Liability of Retired Partner – Section 90 of CGST Act – Petition Dismissed - The petitioner challenged a demand of Rs. 37,84,228/- and land attachment initiated against him under GST laws, arguing he had retired from the partnership firm on 20.04.2021 and was no longer responsible – The Court held that under Section 90 of the CGST Act, a partner remains jointly and severally liable until written intimation of retirement is furnished to the Commissioner – No timely intimation was made – Petitioner's continued reflection as active partner in GST records justified proceedings against him [Paras 5, 10-14].

Alternative Remedy – Maintainability of Writ – Availability of Statutory Appeal under Section 107 of PGST Act – Writ Not Entertained – The Court observed that petitioner had an efficacious remedy under Section 107 of the PGST Act to challenge the assessment and recovery proceedings – Reiterated that writ jurisdiction should not be invoked where statutory remedies exist unless exceptional circumstances are shown – No such circumstances made out [Para 5].

Land Attachment – Validity of Red Entry – Recovery Action Under Section 79 of PGST Act – Upheld – Petitioner's claim that he learned of land attachment only later and did not consent to it was held irrelevant in light of non-compliance with statutory requirements – The Department’s actions in seeking red entry and initiating recovery under DRC-09 and related provisions were found lawful [Paras 3, 6, 8].

Decision – Writ Petition Dismissed – Liberty Granted – The writ petition was dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail alternative remedies in accordance with law [Para 16].

Writ of Mandamus – Section 67B of the Information Technology Act - Child Pornography Allegation – Teaser of Movie "Bad Girl" on YouTube – Direction Issued for Removal – Petitioners alleged that the teaser of a Tamil film hosted on YouTube contains child pornographic and obscene content in violation of child protection laws – Despite filing complaints with relevant authorities, no timely action was taken – Held: State and statutory authorities failed to act despite receiving complaints – Court directed the Union Government to issue appropriate orders for removal of the content and for the Women and Child Commissions to monitor the matter – Criminal proceedings not directed due to lack of specific accused details – Writ petition allowed with directions [Paras 1–14].

Child Protection – State Obligation under Article 39(f) and Article 45 – Responsibility Affirmed – The Court emphasized the constitutional duty of the State to safeguard the moral and emotional well-being of children – Held: Online dissemination of sexually inappropriate material impacts children's minds – Authorities must act proactively to protect young viewers – Court found failure to act contrary to constitutional duties [Paras 7–11].

Criminal Prosecution – No Direction for FIR – Lack of Specific Allegations – Petitioners sought initiation of criminal proceedings under POCSO and POSH Acts – Held: Court declined to issue direction for prosecution since names of accused and full facts were not provided – Petitioners are at liberty to file a complaint before competent authorities [Para 13].

Duty of Online Platforms – Accessibility of Obscene Content – YouTube Not Impleaded – Not Fatal – Though YouTube was not made a party, the Court held that the Union Government has authority to direct removal of content under IT laws – Held: First respondent to act and issue directions within one month to remove the obscene teaser and related content [Paras 12–13].

Matrimonial Law - Maintenance Revision – Quantum of Maintenance – Sections 125 and 127 CrPC – Enhancement Granted with Increment Provision – In this batch of revisions, the wife challenged the Family Court’s order reducing her maintenance from ₹30,000/- to ₹20,000/- while the husband sought further reduction on account of his retirement – The High Court scrutinised the husband’s financial standing, including his post-retirement benefits and assets, and held that the wife’s maintenance should not be reduced below a reasonable standard of living reflective of the matrimonial lifestyle – Held: Monthly maintenance enhanced to ₹25,000/- per month with an increment of 5% every two years to balance the legitimate needs of the wife and the resources of the husband [Paras 1-30].

Maintenance Order Effective Date – No Retrospective Effect – Section 127 CrPC – The Court clarified that the direction to enhance maintenance shall be effective from the date of the Family Court’s order (30.12.2023), refusing retrospective application from the date of the husband’s retirement as claimed by the wife – Exercise of discretion upheld considering fairness and legal principles [Paras 25-27].

Income Tax Return – Not Sole Basis for Determining Income – Section 143(1) Income Tax Act – The Court observed that income tax returns alone do not reflect the actual financial capacity of the husband, especially in maintenance matters – The Court relied upon judicial precedents and considered overall financial indicators, assets, and standard of living while fixing maintenance [Paras 17-24].

Balancing Rights of Parties – Fair Maintenance to Ensure Dignity – The Court reiterated that maintenance is not a charity but a right to ensure a life of dignity for the dependent spouse, and reduced financial capacity does not negate the responsibility towards a non-earning spouse – Final maintenance set at ₹25,000/- per month with increments [Paras 1, 19, 24, 28-30].

Decision – Revisions Partly Allowed – The wife’s revision partly allowed by increasing maintenance; the husband’s revision dismissed – Maintenance fixed at ₹25,000/- per month with 5% increase every two years from 30.12.2023 – Connected applications disposed of accordingly [Paras 28-30].

Criminal Law - Bail – Sections 364A, 392, 397, 412, 34 of the IPC - Sections 25, 27, 54, 59, 30 of the Arms Act - Grant of Bail Post Recording of Key Witnesses – Section 483 BNSS – Bail Granted - The applicant, a dismissed police constable accused in a kidnapping for ransom case, sought bail after the examination of all key material witnesses – The Court noted that after completion of prosecution evidence, risk of tampering or influencing witnesses substantially reduces – Observed prolonged incarceration serves no useful purpose given pending trial duration – Bail granted subject to conditions [Paras 1-9, 22-24].

Presumption of Innocence – Principle Reaffirmed – Despite the serious nature of allegations, the Court reiterated the fundamental principle of presumption of innocence and right to liberty – Referred to landmark rulings emphasizing bail as a rule and jail as an exception – Upheld that gravity of offence alone is not sufficient ground to deny bail if other safeguards exist [Paras 12-13, 23].

Contradictions in Prosecution Case – Discrepancies Noted in Recovery Evidence – The applicant pointed out inconsistencies in police records, including absence of clear CCTV identification, non-conduct of TIP, and conflicting CDR details – The Court refrained from detailed evaluation at bail stage but acknowledged contradictions in case narrative as relevant for bail consideration [Paras 6-9].

Humanitarian Considerations – Custodial Incarceration and Right to Dignity – Court highlighted applicant’s clean antecedents, status as sole breadwinner, and prolonged custody since 2021 – Cited Supreme Court’s emphasis on dignity of accused and overcrowding in jails while allowing bail – Noted the applicant’s reinstatement in service as relevant factor [Paras 4-5, 11, 14].

Bail Conditions – Safeguards Imposed – Bail granted with stringent conditions including personal and surety bonds, appearance before court, furnishing of contact details, no criminal indulgence, and no interference with prosecution witnesses – Safeguards balanced liberty rights with judicial control [Para 24].

Decision – Bail Granted – Application Allowed – The application for regular bail was allowed subject to conditions after considering post-evidence stage, inconsistencies in prosecution case, and humane factors favouring release – Court directed compliance with terms and communication to jail authorities [Paras 24-26].

Civil Writ - Stage Carriage Permit – Renewal Application – Sections 72, 81(4), and 103(2) of Motor Vehicles Act – Writ Petition Allowed – Petitioner sought renewal of stage carriage permit originally granted on Guruvayur–Palakkad route but curtailed to Palakkad–Pattambi following refusal of counter-signature due to notified route restrictions – Rejection of renewal application by RTA Palakkad challenged after multiple favourable decisions by Tribunal and High Court – Held: Refusal to entertain renewal application on curtailed route arbitrary and unsustainable – High Court directed RTA Palakkad to consider renewal application on Palakkad–Pattambi route within one month [Paras 1-25].

Jurisdiction of RTA – Validity of Permit Without Counter-Signature – Section 103(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act – Permit Remains Valid Within Primary Jurisdiction – Rejection by Thrissur RTA does not invalidate permit within Palakkad jurisdiction – High Court reiterated settled principle that absence of counter-signature only limits operation to primary region and does not render permit invalid [Paras 17-19].

Maintainability of Writ Petition – Alternate Remedy – Article 226 of the Constitution – Judicial Review Permitted – Even when alternate remedy exists, writ petition maintainable to correct arbitrariness and legal misinterpretation especially after repeated directions by courts and tribunal – High Court entertained petition under Article 226 [Paras 16-17].

Renewal on Curtailed Route – Modification Without Variation Application – Sections 72 and 103(2) of Motor Vehicles Act – Permissible – High Court held application for renewal on curtailed route maintainable even without separate application for variation – Curtailment due to operation of law is valid basis for modified renewal [Paras 23-25].

Decision – Impugned Rejection Quashed – High Court quashed Ext.P13 order of RTA Palakkad and directed consideration of renewal application on curtailed route Palakkad–Pattambi in accordance with law within one month with prior notice to petitioner and respondents [Para 25].