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) 42001

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
LENIN ALEXANDER – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Application No. 8228 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.ALEX K.JOHN, SHRI.SIJIN STANLEY, SHRI.SATHEESH T.P., SHRI.SURESH P.N., SHRI.ARUN K.V., SMT. JILCY JACOB, SHRI.NINAN THOMAS, SHRI.GEGO GEORGE, SMT.PRATHITHA MARIYAM THOMAS
For the Respondents: SMT. SREEJA V.

Court mandates that notice of allegations should be provided to accused individuals prior to any legal action, ensuring fair process.

Headnote:This bail application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The petitioners, accused 1 and 2, apprehend arrest without knowledge of allegations against them. The Public Prosecutor states no crime registered. Court determined apprehension of arrest does not subsist; proper notice must outline allegations. Thus, the bail application is closed.

Table of Content
1. petitioners claim ignorance of allegations. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. court determines arrest apprehension does not apply. (Para 5 , 6)

ORDER

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

2. Petitioners apprehend that they have been arrayed as accused 1 and 2 in a crime before the Anjuthengu Coastal Police, Thiruvananthapuram.

3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, though a notice under Section 63 of the Kerala Police Act, 2011 [for short, ‘the Act’]; was issued, he is unaware of the facts pertaining to such a notice and without the nature of allegations being made available, he could not even appear pursuant to the said notice.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor, upon instructions, submitted that no crime has been registered against the petitioners before the Anjuthengu Coastal Police, Thiruvananthapuram. However, it was submitted that petitioners did not turn up before the said Coastal Police pursuant to Annexure-A2 notice.

5. In view of the above submission that petitioners are arrayed as accused which submission is recorded, the apprehension of arrest of the petitioners by the Anjuthengu Coastal Police, Thiruvananthapuram, does not subsist.

6. However, if in case petitioners are proposed to be proceeded against for any crime allegedly committed by them, notice under Section 35 (3) of the BNSS shall be issued. Further, if in case the Police require the presence of the petitioners under Section 63 of the Act, they must necessarily be informed about the nature of allegations. Notice under of the Act, implies that relevant documents or information supporting the notice should be attached with it.

With the above observations, this bail application is closed.

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