Individuals are vested with the right to choose their gender, not courts; Sex and Gender - not the same Kerala high court

Individuals are vested with the right to choose their gender, not courts; Sex and Gender – not the same: Kerala high court

A court in Kerala has recently ordered the conditional attachment of the property of a police Sub-Inspector (SI) who is among those accused of assaulting and tormenting a Kollam-based attorney [C Jayakumar v G Gopakumar & Others].

Sub-Judge Santosh Das ordered the accused SI to provide a 25 lakh bond or to explain why he should not provide such a bond.

The court ordered that the accused’s property be seized as an interim measure.

“In the interim, the property listed in schedule No. 2 of this petition (property belonging to the SI) will be subject to conditional attachment,” the court ruled.

The order was issued in response to an application filed by the aggrieved attorney, C Jayakumar, in connection with his litigation against officials of the Karunagappally Police Station, who were allegedly responsible for his alleged torture while in custody.

Upon evaluating the opposing arguments, the court determined that the attorney had presented a compelling prima facie case against the police officers and that there was a likelihood that the compensation claim would be successful.

As a result, the application of the attorney concerning the SI’s property was granted.

“It is affirmed by the petitioner that this respondent (SI) is taking hasty steps to alienate petition schedule No. 2 property,” the court reasoned. “If this is permitted, the scope of any decree that may be passed against this respondent will be severely limited.”

The attorney filed suit against the Circle Inspector (CI) of the Karunagapally Police, its SI, and a doctor, seeking compensation.

In his application, the attorney informed the court that he had received information from a real estate broker that the accused officials, including the SI, were rushing to sell their properties and were attempting to move out of the court’s jurisdiction.

The attorney asserts that police officials arrested and tortured his client on September 5, 2022, on the premise of a false accusation. The attorney had previously led an agitation against the CI, which led to his transfer in 2010, according to court testimony.

Consequently, the attorney asserted that in 2022, the CI conspired and colluded with three thugs to create a commotion in order for the police to arrest him.

The attorney claimed that as he drove towards Karunagappally Railway Station, the thugs obstructed his vehicle and caused a disturbance.

He claimed that the police officials arrived at the scene of the altercation immediately, arrested him, tormented him, and did not release him until late at night.


Rakesh Sharma

Mr. Rakesh Sharma, advocate is the most experienced member of our team and when it comes t...

The Law Codes

Siddharth Sharma

Siddharth Sharma is one of our leading and versatile lawyers who believe in dynamic lawyer...

The Law Codes

Rohit Samhotra

Dr. Samhotra is a dental graduate, and he continued the dental practice for a few years af...

The Law Codes

Sunny Menghi

Sunny Menghi embarked on his academic journey in Law at Panjab University, earning his bac...

The Law Codes

Ameesha Goel

Ameesha is among our young talents and a graduate of IP University, Delhi. She has a zeal ...

The Law Codes

V. Chaitanya Rao

V. Chaitanya Rao is one of the newer members of The Law Codes team. He brings an air of yo...

The Law Codes
error: Content is protected !!