Bail granted on merits where detention is deemed unnecessary; alibi evidence to be considered at trial; antecedents do not automatically preclude bail; conditions may safeguard witnesses and ensure appearance.

ORDER

This bail application is filed under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ BNSS ’).

2. Petitioner is the 14^th accused in Crime No.321 of 2025 of Kolathur Police Station, Malappuram, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 127 (2), 115(1), 118(1), 137(2), 310(2), 317(3), 238(c) and 110 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 .

3. According to the prosecution, on 05.05.2025, the accused had, due to a previous animosity with the de facto complainant, attacked him with iron rods and reapers and robbed the de facto complainant of his mobile phone and a sum of Rs.7,000/- and thereby committed the offences alleged. Petitioner was arrested on 05.07.2025 and he has been in custody since then.

4. Heard Sri.Saiby Jose Kidangoor, the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri.Noushad K.A., the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the prosecution allegations are false and that petitioner has no involvement in the alleged crime and that he was not even in station at the relevant time, as evident from Annexures A3 and A4. It was also submitted that petitioner has been in custody from

05.07.2025 and he ought to be released on bail.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and pointed out that petitioner is involved in six other cases and that petitioner ought not to be released on bail. 7. Petitioner, along with the other accused, is alleged to have assaulted the de facto complainant with iron rods and other dangerous weapons and forcibly abducted him and took him to various places. Though the allegations are serious, considering the fact that petitioner was arrested on 05.07.2025 and he has been in custody since then, I am of the view that further detention is not necessary. Therefore, petitioner ought to be released on bail.

8. Though the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioner is involved in six other crimes, considering the period of detention already undergone by him in the instant case, those antecedents need not not deter this Court from granting bail to the petitioner. Therefore, petitioner ought to be released on bail.

9. Though the learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner was not even in station at the relevant time as evident from Annexures A3 and A4, I am of the view that a plea of alibi has to be considered during trial, and not at this stage.

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

(a) Petitioner 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 to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.

(b) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating OfÏcer as and when required.

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

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

(e) 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.