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) 17573

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
IRSHAD V. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl. 5833/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.K.RAKESH
For the Respondents: SMT. SREEJA V.

The recovery of stolen property and serious health issues can justify anticipatory bail under specified conditions.

Headnote:This bail application arises from allegations under section 379 IPC relating to motorcycle theft during certain dates. The court finds that, although serious allegations exist, the recovery of the stolen item coupled with the petitioner's health conditions allows for anticipatory bail under specified conditions. The issues of necessity for custodial interrogation are framed alongside the court's reasoning referencing precedents like Sushila Aggarwal v. State. The application is granted with conditions to maintain the integrity of the investigation.

Table of Content
1. application of bnss and overview of the case details. (Para 4)
2. arguments regarding the necessity of custodial interrogation and the health condition of the petitioner. (Para 6 , 7)

ORDER

This bail application is filed under section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (for short ‘ BNSS ’).

2. Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.585 of 2022 of Thamarassery Police Station, Kozhikode, registered for the offences punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. According to the prosecution, during the period

26.09.2022 to 28.09.2022, the motor cycle of the de facto complainant, which was parked near a BSNL OfÏce at Thamarassery Chungam, was stolen and thereby the aforesaid crime was registered.

4. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. Sri.K.Rakesh, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the entire prosecution allegations are false and that the incident as alleged had not occurred. It was further submitted that the bike has already been recovered and hence custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary. The learned Counsel also pointed out that petitioner is suffering from serious psychiatric illness as evident from Annexure B,C & D and, therefore, custodial interrogation ought to be avoided.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the prosecution allegations are serious in nature and hence petitioner ought not be granted anticipatory bail. It was further submitted that though the stolen bike has been recovered during investigation, custodial interrogation is necessary.

6. The crime is of the year 2022. The stolen article has already been recovered. Petitioner is the suspect. He is allegedly suffering from a disorder.

7. Though petitioner’s illness cannot be a reason to avoid custodial interrogation, since the stolen bike has already been recovered, I am of the view that petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail, by granting limited custody as held inSushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), [(2020) 5 SCC 1] .

Accordingly, this application is allowed on the following conditions:

(a) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating OfÏcer on 11.06.2025 at 10 a.m. and shall subject himself to interrogation till 5 p.m on that day (b) If after interrogation, the Investigating OfÏcer proposes to arrest the petitioner, then, he shall be released on bail on him executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum before the Investigating OfÏcer.

(c) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating OfÏcer as and when required and shall also co-operate with the investigation.

(d) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence.

(e) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail.

(f) Petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the Court having jurisdiction.

In case of violation of any of the above conditions or if any modification or deletion of the conditions are required, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider such applications, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.

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