SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(KER) 5205

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P. G. Ajithkumar, J
JIJIMON THOMAS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl. 1007/2025



Advocates:
BIJU .C. ABRAHAM, THOMAS C.ABRAHAM, BASIL MATHEW

Bail is the rule and jail is the exception; arrest must be justified and not routine.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 296(b), 126(1), 75(1)(iii), 75(1)(iv) - Bail application filed under Section 482 - Accused alleged to have abused and obstructed a public official - Non-bailable offences with maximum punishment below 7 years - Court emphasized that arrest should not be routine and must be justified. (Paras 6, 8, 9, 10)

(B) Bail - Principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception - The necessity of custodial interrogation must be justified by the prosecution. (Paras 8, 9)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner is accused in a case alleging offences under the BNS for abusing a ward member and obstructing her while she was walking. The petitioner claims the case is false. (Paras 2, 3, 5)

Findings of Court:
The court found that custodial interrogation was not necessary and granted bail with stringent conditions. (Paras 7, 11)

Issues: The main issues were whether the arrest was necessary and the justification for the bail application. (Paras 6, 8)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that arrest should not be routine and must be justified, emphasizing the importance of personal liberty and the conditions under which arrest is warranted. (Paras 6, 9)

Result: Bail application allowed with conditions.

ORDER

This Bail Application is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

2. The petitioner is an accused in Crime No. 43/2025 of Udumbanchola Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Secs. 296(b), 126(1), 75(1)(iii) and 75(1)(iv) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023 (for short ' BNS ').

3. The prosecution case is that on 12.01.2025 at 4 pm at Mukkudi City, the petitioner abused the defacto complainant, who is the ward member of Senapathy Grama Panchayat in front of public using filthy language and also obstructed the defacto complainant, while she was walking on the street with the electric autorickshaw of the petitioner.

4. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor.

5. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is not correct. The counsel also takes me through the documents produced along with the bail application to show that there are serious allegations against the defacto complainant. The counsel also submitted that the present case is a false case foisted against the petitioner. The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

6. This Court considered the contentions of the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. The only non-bailable offences alleged against the petitioner are under Secs.75(1) (ii) and 75(1)(iv) of the BNS . The maximum punishment that can be imposed for the above offences are below 7 years. The prosecution can prove the case through oral evidence.

In Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and another [(2014) 8 SCC 273], the Apex Court observed like this :

“7.1. From a plain reading of the aforesaid provision, it is evident that a person accused of an offence punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years with or without fine, cannot be arrested by the police officer only on his satisfaction that such person had committed the offence punishable as aforesaid. A police officer before arrest, in such cases has to be further satisfied that such arrest is necessary to prevent such person from committing any further offence; or for proper investigation of the case: or to prevent the accused from causing the evidence of the offence to disappear; or tampering with such evidence in any manner; or to prevent such person from making any inducement, threat or promise to a Witness so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or the police officer; or unless such accused person is arrested, his presence in the court whenever required cannot be ensured. These are the conclusions, which one may reach based on facts.

7.2. The law mandates the police officer to state the facts and record the reasons in writing which led him to come to a conclusion covered by any of the provisions aforesaid. while making such arrest. The law further requires the police officers to record the reasons in writing for not making the arrest.

7.3. In pith and core, the police officer before arrest must put a question to himself, why arrest? Is it really required? What purpose it will serve? What object it will achieve? It is only after these questions are addressed and one or the other conditions as enumerated above is satisfied, the power of arrest needs to be exercised. In fine, before arrest first the police officers should have reason to believe on the basis of information and material that the accused has committed the offence. Apart from this, the police officer has to be satisfied further that the arrest is necessary for one or the more purposes envisaged by sub-clauses (a) to (e) of clause (1) of Section 41 CrPC.”

7. Keeping in mind the above principle, I think the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary. The petitioner can be released on bail, after imposing stringent conditions.

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 Chidamb

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top