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) 32771

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Kauser Edappagath, J
THAJUDHEEN AGED 53 YEARS S/O.SAIDU MUHAMMED – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 7366 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)
For the Respondents: SR.PP NOUSHAD K.A

Court granted pre-arrest bail citing insufficient grounds for custodial interrogation of the accused.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 126(2), 115(2), 296(b), 74 and 329(4) - Pre-arrest bail - Applicants accused of criminal trespass and manhandling the complainant due to enmity over a motorcycle gift - No specific allegations against the applicants for Section 74 - Court held that custodial interrogation is not necessary, allowing bail. (Paras 3, 6)

(B) Pre-arrest bail - Conditions outlined by the court for bail, including cooperation with the investigation and non-contact with prosecution witnesses.

Table of Content
1. accused charged with criminal trespass regarding a familial issue. (Para 2 , 3)
2. defense counsel argues for innocence and lack of evidence. (Para 5)
3. court finds no need for custodial interrogation for pre-arrest bail. (Para 6)

O R D E R

This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 seeking pre-arrest bail.

2. The applicants are the accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.599 of 2025 of Vadakkencherry Police Station, Palakkad District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 126 (2), 115(2), 296(b), 74 and 329(4) of BNS.

3. The prosecution case in short, is that on 20.05.2025 at about 12.45 hours, the accused sharing common intention committed criminal trespass into the defacto complainant's matrimonial home and manhandled the defacto complainant by uttering obscene words due to their enmity for not giving back the motor cycle gifted by the 2nd accused at the time of her marriage. It is also alleged that the accused also manhandled the defacto complainant's in-laws by uttering obscene words against them.

4. I have heard Sri.V.A.Johnson, the learned counsel for the applicants and Sri.Noushad K.A, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicants with the alleged crime; hence, they are entitled to get bail. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicants, and if they are released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.

6. The 1st applicant is the father and the 2nd applicant is the brother of the de facto complainant. Initially, Section 74 of BNS was not incorporated in the FIR. It was incorporated subsequently after 2 days. There are no specific allegations to attract the ingredients of of BNS. Considering the allegations levelled against the applicants, their custodial interrogation does not appear to be necessary. For these reasons, it is a fit case where pre-arrest bail can be granted to the applicants.

In the result, the application is allowed on the following conditions:-

(i) The applicants shall be released on bail in the event of their arrest on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) each with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer, as the case may be.

(ii) The applicants shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting themselves to the deemed police custody for discovery, if any, as and when demanded.

(iii) The applicants shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until further orders. They shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.

(iv) The applicants shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.

(v) The applicants shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

(vi) The applicants shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.

(vii) The application, if any, for deletion/modification of bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of violating the bail conditions shall be filed at the jurisdictional 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