M.K.Manoharan v. Sathyanath
Case brief
What is this about?
Dismissing a contempt petition, the Court held that materials show police intervened upon complaints and took appropriate action. It observed that the truthfulness of allegations could not be ascertained in a writ matter and found no case of contempt made out against the SHO.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1396 OF 2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 29TH ASWINA, 1943
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1396 OF 2021
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 30.03.2021 IN WP(C) 3829/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/PETITIONER:
M.K.MANOHARAN, AGED 64 YEARS,
S/O. LAKSHMI, THEVORATH HOUSE, KANNOOKARA, THANA POST, KANNUR DISTRICT,PIN-670 012.
BY ADV P.K.RAVISANKAR
RESPONDENT/3RD RESPONDENT:
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner has established a case of contempt against the respondent Head Constable for allegedly refusing protection.
Whether the High Court should punish for contempt of court directions issued in a civil matter regarding temple management.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
M.K. Manoharan
- respondent
Sathy Nath
- respondent
Resmitha R. Chandran
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court