Bail is the rule and jail is the exception; courts must grant bail when a case is made out, regardless of the seriousness of allegations.

O R D E R

This Bail Application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita .

2. Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.939 of 2024 of Thrikkunnapuzha Police Station, Alappuzha. The above case is registered against the petitioners alleging offences punishable under Sections 115 (2), 118(1), 296(b), 103(1), 126(2) r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS'). The petitioners were arrested on 05.12.2024.

3. The prosecution case is that the deceased person is the husband of the 1^st accused and nephew of the complainant. On 03.12.2024, at 9:00 p.m., in front of the residence of the 1^st accused, a fight started between the 1^st accused and deceased person. Upon knowing the same, the accused Nos.2, 3 & 4 arrived at the place, and started assaulting the deceased. Hearing the commotion, the complainant's brother reached the location, and the accused persons assaulted him as well. Subsequently, the husband of 1^st accused fell down due to the injury inflicted by the accused. He was taken to the hospital, but he succumbed to his injuries on the way. Hence, it is alleged that the accused committed the above said offences. Originally the case was registered under Sections 115 (2), 105 & 3(5) of the BNS. Subsequently, Section 103 of the BNS is also added.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are not correct. The 1^st petitioner is the wife of the deceased. There was a brutal assault by the deceased on the 1^st petitioner, and others arrived after hearing the 1^st petitioner's cries. The counsel submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide any conditions if this Court grant them bail. They are in custody from 05.12.2024.

6. The Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the bail application and submitted that it is a clear case in which the petitioners attempted to kill the deceased. The Public Prosecutor submitted that the deceased was a heart patient. Knowing fully well about the same, the petitioners attacked the deceased and the deceased died.

7. This Court considered the contentions of the petitioners and the Public Public Prosecutor. The petitioners earlier filed a bail application before this Court as B.A. No.745/2025. After hearing both sides, this Court was not inclined to grant bail. At that stage, the counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the bail application with liberty to move it again. This Court granted liberty to move the bail application after three weeks. Accordingly, the present bail application is filed. It is true that the allegation against the petitioners is very serious. But the petitioners are in custody from 15.12.2024. The Public Prosecutor submitted that, if the petitioners are released on bail, there will be problem in the area where the alleged incident was happened. If that be the case, there can be a direction to the petitioners not to enter the jurisdictional limit of Thrikkunnappuzha Police Station for a period of one month. With the above condition, I think the petitioners can be released on bail.

8. Moreover, it is a well accepted principle that the bail is the rule and the jail is the exception. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chidambaram. P v. Directorate of Enforcement [2019 (16) SCALE 870] , after considering all the earlier judgments, observed that, the basic jurisprudence relating to bail remains the same inasmuch as the grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception so as to ensure that the accused has the oppor