ഇന്നത്തെ കോടതി വിധികൾ, 11 നവംബർ 2026: ബാർ സമയം, Banking Ombudsman, കഞ്ചാവ് കേസ് ഉൾപ്പെടെ കേരള ഹൈക്കോടതിയുടെ അഞ്ച് വിധികൾ

The Supreme Court is on its Diwali break from 9 to 14 November, so the 11 November 2026 edition of Infinity is Known's daily verdicts video covers only five Kerala High Court judgments, two from Tuesday 10 November and three from 11 November. It is not legal advice, only a plain explanation of official rulings. Each case name below links to the official PDF on the High Court's website.

1. Bar hours and DJ nights

Mahadevan v. State of Kerala & Ors., WP(C) 17410/2026, 2026:KER:85771, Justice Murali Purushothaman, 10-11-2026. The petitioner holds the FL-3 licence for a five-star bar hotel in Kochi. Police notices barred DJ events after 11 PM despite the hours the excise licence allowed. The court quashed those notices. A mere possibility that an offence might happen is not enough to cut permitted hours. If offences such as drug use do occur, the police must act under the law. If noise pollution rules are broken, the Commissioner can issue control directions. On the eve of a dry day, the bar must close by midnight.

2. No "settlement" without consent

Mohamed Shafi v. The Banking Ombudsman & Ors., WP(C) 17547/2026, 2026:KER:85382, Justice M.A. Abdul Hakhim, 10-11-2026. After the Ombudsman issued an advisory, the bank paid within days and the complaint was closed as "resolved", even though the complainant had not agreed. A settlement, the court said, is an agreement between both parties. The closure order was set aside. The Ombudsman must pass an award under Clause 15 of the scheme within three months, and the amount already paid will be subject to that final award.

3. An open university syndicate

Prof. Dr. P.P. Ajayakumar & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Ors., WP(C) 27541/2026, 2026:KER:85765, Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan, 11-11-2026. The petitioners had been nominated to the Sree Narayana Guru Open University syndicate by the previous government and challenged their replacement. The court found that the Act sets no fixed term for nominated members, so there is no legal right to continue. The petition was dismissed, though the court noted the withdrawal does not lower the petitioners' standing.

4. A cannabis sentence cut from 10 years to 4

Shinoy v. State of Kerala, Crl.A. 1259/2015, 2026:KER:86295, Justice A. Badharudeen, 11-11-2026. The case goes back to a 2009 seizure of cannabis by the Tirur excise team. The NDPS special court in Vadakara had imposed 10 years. The High Court upheld the conviction but, treating the amount as an intermediate quantity, reduced the sentence to four years of rigorous imprisonment. Bail stands cancelled, and the appellant must surrender before the special court.

5. A chit-fund cheque case

A.M. Gopalan (Sree Gokulam Chit & Finance Co.) v. State of Kerala & Anr., Crl.A. 1414/2011, 2026:KER:86277, also Justice A. Badharudeen, 11-11-2026. The magistrate had acquitted the accused under the Negotiable Instruments Act, and the High Court dismissed the appeal. The cheque was dated a month before the chit auction, and the chit accounts were not produced. Showing a cheque is not enough: the complainant must first prove a legally enforceable debt.

Appeals are possible; the channel offers no opinion. Its question for viewers: have you ever taken a bank complaint to the Banking Ombudsman?