Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Crime Case Details: The case involves a criminal investigation under Crime No. 1344/2024 at Karamana Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, with the petitioner Sonomon, aged 19, involved. The case is discussed in the context of bail and procedural considerations Sources: 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 20673, ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 42748"].
Legal Proceedings & Court Observations:
Courts have scrutinized grounds of arrest, communication of arrest reasons, and compliance with legal mandates before granting bail Sources: 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 20673, ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 53468"], ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 42748"].
Bail and Detention:
The courts have also considered whether the case involves heinous crimes, influence on witnesses, or risk of absconding, affecting bail decisions Sources: 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 20673, ["2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 45554"], ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 53463"].
Legal Principles and Precedents:
Notably, the Supreme Court's stance on procedural fairness and the obligation to consider material objectively is highlighted Sources: 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 20673, ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 53468"].
Additional Context:
2025 Khc(online) 1344 pertains to legal proceedings involving a criminal case in Kerala, with significant judicial scrutiny on procedural fairness, especially regarding arrest procedures, communication of grounds, and bail conditions. The courts emphasize adherence to constitutional and statutory rights, ensuring that accused persons are not unjustly detained and that procedural safeguards are maintained. The case reflects ongoing judicial commitment to fair trial principles and lawful conduct in criminal justice processes.
References:- 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 20673- 2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 37551- 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 53468- 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 56606- 2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 45554- 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 53463- 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 42748
In the fast-paced world of legal research, finding a specific judgment can feel like hunting for a needle in a haystack. Many lawyers, researchers, and even laypersons often query: Can you send me the Judgment Link of 2025 Khc Online 1361? This citation refers to a presumed Kerala High Court (KHC) online judgment from 2025, part of the Kerala High Court Online database, which publishes recent rulings digitally. However, as we'll explore, not all citations yield immediate results. This post dives deep into the availability of this specific case, analyzes provided legal documents, and highlights related 2025 KHC precedents to aid your research.
Whether you're a legal professional verifying precedents or someone navigating a case, understanding database limitations and alternatives is crucial. Let's break it down step by step.
A thorough review of extensive legal document repositories reveals no direct record or reference to '2025 KHC Online 1361' (or closely similar '2025 KHC (Online) 1344' as sometimes queried). The analyzed materials include numerous case IDs such as 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2790, 2025 6 Supreme 244, 2025 8 Supreme 499, 2023 5 Supreme 701, 2025 1 Supreme 275, 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2824, 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2713, 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2682, 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 1985, 2005 8 Supreme 770, 1966 0 Supreme(SC) 336, 1992 0 Supreme(SC) 812, 1961 0 Supreme(SC) 304, 1942 0 Supreme(Cal) 72, and 1997 2 Supreme 634. None match the exact citation. 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2790
Key points from the analysis:- Provided references feature 2025 KHC OnLine cases like 806 or 6430, but not 1361 or 1344. 2025 6 Supreme 244- Instructions limit scope to supplied documents, precluding external searches. 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2824- This absence suggests the citation may stem from a different database, unpublished ruling, or typographical variation.
In legal practice, citations like KHC Online are sequential and database-specific. If unavailable, it typically means the judgment isn't indexed in the reviewed archives yet—or may not exist under that number. Always cross-verify with official sources like the Kerala High Court website or SCC OnLine.
While 2025 KHC Online 1361 remains elusive, several contemporaneous Kerala High Court rulings offer valuable context on procedural, criminal, and civil matters. These can guide researchers facing similar citation hunts. Here's a curated selection from verified documents:
In a Supreme Court-related filing, the application of Section 52-A of the NDPS Act was deemed inappropriate. The court referenced Narcotics Control Bureau v. Kashif and Bharat Aambale v. State of Chhattisgarh, dismissing SLPs after noting respondents' 4-5 years incarceration. The reliance on Section 52-A in the impugned judgment was found inappropriate. 2025 Supreme(Online)(SC) 1374
This underscores how statutory sections may not fit all narcotics scenarios, a common theme in 2025 rulings.
The Kerala High Court frequently addresses revenue and administrative disputes. In one case, a petitioner's right to file a fresh Form-6 application was upheld, setting aside an impugned order based on precedents like Basil v. LLMC (2024 (1) KHC 28) and Anu Mathew v. RDO (2022 (6) KLT). Result: 'Ext.P4 order is set aside.' 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 55292
Similarly, in mining matters, courts emphasize adherence to precedents in environmental law, dismissing writs per Muhammed C.P. v. Geologist (2025 KHC Online 948). 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 49059
Bail remains a hot topic. '
Contrastingly, anticipatory
These cases illustrate 2025 KHC's focus on procedural fairness, echoing potential themes in the queried 1361.
If 2025 KHC Online 1361 isn't in standard repositories:1. Official Portals: Check highcourt.kerala.gov.in or ker HC judgments section.2. Databases: SCC OnLine, Manupatra, Indian Kanoon—search variations like '2025 KHC 1361'.3. Verify Citation: Confirm year, series (e.g., KHC OnLine vs. KLT).4. Contact Court Registry: For unreported cases.5. Alternatives: Review cited precedents in related dockets. 2005 8 Supreme 770
Disclaimer: This post provides general information based on reviewed materials and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified attorney for case-specific guidance. Rulings may evolve, so verify latest developments.
Stay informed on Kerala High Court trends—bookmark for more judgment breakdowns!
#KHCJudgments #KeralaHighCourt #LegalResearch
NO. 1287 OF 2025 CRIME NO.1344/2024 OF Karamana Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram PETITIONER/S: SONUMON AGED 19 YEARS S/O. SURENDRAN KRIPA BHAVAN, KIDARAKUZHY, MANNAYAM,MOONANAKUZHY P.O. ... Directorate of Enforcement [2024 KHC 6426], also the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that: B.A.No.1287 of 2025 ------------------------------- Dated this the 05th day of February, 2025 O R D E R This Bail Application ....
Kumar Sanjay and another [2002 KHC 1889], Mona Aresh Goel V. Aresh Satya Goel [2000 KHC 1835], Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap V. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap [2016 KHC 6489] and Santhini V. Vijaya Venkatesh [2017 (5) KHC 48]. ... ORDER 14/2/2021 Annexure III A TRUE COPY OF THE O.P.179/2021 DATED 14/2/2021 Annexure IV A TRUE COPY OF THE O.P.1344
3 2025 SCC OnLine SC 110. SLP (Crl.) No. 8556/2024. ... IA No. 22740/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES SLP(Crl) No. 1344/2025 (II-A) IA No. 24101/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No ... NARAYANAN) AR-CUM-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 2 (2024) SCC OnLine 3848. ... . 22739/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O....
2025 (5) KHC 203 ) and Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra and Another (2025 KHC OnLine 6915) in support of his contentions. ... -------------------------------------- B.A No.13679 of 2025 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of November, 2025 O R ... Sri.Darshan (2025 ICO 1876), contends that substantial compliance....
Karthikeyan [1989 KHC 18] and Kerala Public Service Commission v. Reshmi K.R and Others [2019 (5) KHC 875] and the general conditions of the PSC, that claims made subsequent to the submission of an application cannot be considered under any circumstances. ... (EKM) NO. 1344 OF 2020 WITH ITS ANNEXURES. ... OA(EKM) 1344/2020 DATED 22.10.2021. ... The Kerala Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'the PSC' fo....
State of Andhra Pradesh [2025 SCC OnLine SC 1228 = 2025 KHC OnLine 6542], Shahina v. State of Kerala [2025 (5) KHC 203] and Mihir Rajesh Shah v. ... State of Haryana [(2025) 5 SCC 799 = 2025 KHC 6116], Ahmed Mansoor v. State [2025 KHC OnLine 7583], Kasireddy U....
RDO , 2025 KHC Online 1637, Basil v. LLMC , 2024 (1) KHC 28 & in Anu Mathew v. RDO , 2022 (6) KLT. ... Revenue Divisional O Ernakulam [2025 KHC OnLine 1637], the petitioner wants to file a Form – 6 application. Therefore, it is submitted that the impugned order may be set aside. ... RDO , 2023 (4 ) KHC 524. Aparna Sasi Menon v. RDO , 2023 (6) #HL_....
Accordingly, these writ petitions are dismissed in terms of the decisions in Muhammed C.P. v Geologist, District Officer , Mining and Geology Department (2025 KHC Online 948) ... KHC Online 948) J U D G M E N T It is submitted that the issue is covered in favour of the petitioners in both cases by the judgments of this Court in Muhammed C.P. v Geologist, District Officer , Mining and Geology Department ....
State of Haryana (2025) 5 SCC 799 = (2025 KHC 6116), Ahmed Mansoor v. State (2025 KHC OnLine 7583), Kasireddy Upender Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2025 SCC OnLine SC 1228) = (2025 KHC OnLine 6542) and Shahina v. ... State of Kerala (2025 (5) KHC 203). ... A....
State of Kerala [ 2025 SCC OnLine KER 1260 ] is applicable in this case also. 8. ... State of Kerala [ 2025 SCC OnLine KER 1260 ] is applicable in this case also. ( Joginder Kumar v. ... State of Kerala [ 2025 SCC OnLine KER 1260 ] is applicable in this case also. the opportunity of securing fair trial. 9. ... State of Kerala [ 2025 SCC OnLine KER ....
781/2004 and 784/2004 was discussed. But the trial court dismissed those petitions but believed the evidence of PW3 to the effect that the attesting witnesses were no more. In fact, no serious dispute raised from the other side as far as the death of the attesting witnesses are concerned. Therefore, the available witness, the document writer, was examined. “xxxx xxxx xxxx It is true that as per Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, (for short, ‘the Evidence Act’, hereinafter) if a doc....
9. The learned Public Prosecutor, as well as the learned counsel for the grandmother of the victim child pointed out the bar contained in Section 438(4) Cr.P.C. against entertaining pre-arrest bail application in respect of offences under Section 376 AB IPC . Per contra, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no absolute bar in invoking the powers under Section 438 Cr.P. C in a case where it would prima facie appear that the accusations against the applicant ar....
T. v. Vinayaka Granites [2025 (1) KLT 287 : 2025 KHC OnLine 4] an appeal under Section 19(1) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 is not maintainable against the impugned orders of the learned Single Judge. 12. Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act deals with appeal. As per sub-section (1) of Section 19, an appeal shall lie as of right from any order or decision of the High Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt (a) where the order or d....
: 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 392], Ajwar v. Waseem , the Apex Court considered this question after referring its earlier judgments and afÏrmed the principles in paragraphs 27 and 28 as under: “27. It is equally well settled that bail once granted, ought not to be cancelled in a mechanical manner. However, an unreasoned or perverse order of bail is always open to interference by the superior Court. 19. Before addressing this question, it is relevant to refer the law governing cancellatio....
5. The learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 argued that while passing Ext.P11 judgment in pursuance to the direction of this Court in Ext.P10 judgment, the Tribunal once again failed to consider the evidence on record. In Ext. In the absence of such an enquiry in that case, the Court held that the Rules of natural justice was violated and hence the impugned order of dismissal was held as rightly set aside by the High Court. The learned counsel relied on the judgments of the Apex Court in In....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.