Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
Dipu Jacob, S/O K.L Jacob – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
ORDER :
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
This bail application is filed under section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ BNSS ’).
2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.226 of 2025 of Udayamperoor Police Station, Ernakulam, registered for the offences punishable under Section 196 (1)(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 [for short, ‘the BNS ’] and Section 2 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971 [for short, ‘the National Honour Act’].
3. According to the prosecution, the accused, with an intention to promote disharmony, enmity, hatred and ill-will between different communal and political organisations, had kept the Indian Flag near the bathroom of an auditorium by name ‘Jesus Generation’ and also displayed the Indian Flag along with the Pakistan Flag and conducted a religious service and thereby committed the offences alleged.
4. Sri.Rajesh Kumar T.K., the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegations are false and the said incident has been misinterpreted by the complainant with some ulterior motives. According to the learned Counsel, petitioner is the owner of an auditorium, where prayers were conducted by the Pentecos
The court determined that a lack of prima facie evidence for intent to insult the National Flag or promote disharmony justified granting bail subject to conditions for cooperating with the investigat....
Insulting the National Flag constitutes a serious offence that threatens public order, justifying the denial of bail.
The court held that inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be used to quash proceedings based on factual disputes, which must be resolved by the trial court.
Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view t....
The court determined the necessity of custodial interrogation, allowing bail with specific conditions to protect the integrity of the investigation.
Anticipatory bail considerations include the nature of the offence and necessity for custodial interrogation, with the State required to provide substantial justification for such interrogation.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of actus reus and mens rea for an offence under Section 2 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971.
The court ruled that freedom of speech and assembly does not protect incitement to violence and public disorder, emphasizing the need to ensure legal adherence and community harmony.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
