Anticipatory bail is granted when mens rea is doubtful and custodial interrogation is not required, emphasizing individual freedom within legal parameters.

ORDER

This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS ), 2023.

2. The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.884/2025 of Nedumbassery Airport Police Station. They are alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Sections 115 (2), 118(1) and 126(2) read with Section 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita ( BNS ).

3. The prosecution case as discernible from Anx.B order reads thus:

“Accused Nos.1 and 2 are the therapist of Bhaishajya Ayurveda Hospital Athani. On 31.07.2025, the accused has used a smartphone inside the treatment room of the hospital and the defacto complainant made a complaint to Dr.Ardra of the hospital regarding the same. Out of this said animosity with intention to cause hurt to the defacto complainant on 02.08.2025, then she arrived at the hospital for Ayurvedic treatment including 'kizhi” and massage, they had forcefully laid her on the treatment table and hot “kizhi” was used to inflict burn injuries on several parts of the body. When the defacto complainant tried to escape there, they forcefully put her on the treatment table and attacked with their hand causing pain to her.(sic)”

4. The case of the petitioners is as follows:

“The petitioners are working as the therapists at Bhaishajya Ayurveda Hospital. The defacto complainant approached the hospital for treatment. She was advised to go for podikizhi and massage. The treatment was advised for a period of 5 days and rest for another 5 days. The defacto complainant was not admitted in the hospital. The treatment was only for one hour in the morning and she came on 30.07.2025. The treatment was continued on 31.07.2025 also. There are some side effects to the kizhi treatment which was explained to the defacto complainant. The process is to apply the kizhi to the affected area by gentle pressure. She has no complaint for 3 days. On 02.08.2025, she came to the hospital and complained of suffering pain and colour change in her hands, legs and shoulder. On 03.08.2025, she informed of change of skin colour to the doctor. This is as a result of part of the treatment. There is no basis for the allegation that with an intention to cause injury the petitioners have done anything.(sic)”

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not intentionally committed any acts as alleged. It is further submitted that the petitioners have only discharged the responsibility entrusted to them by the Doctor.

7. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail plea of the petitioners.

8. I have gone through the Case Diary. It is submitted that the mens rea of the petitioners in the commission of the alleged offences is doubtful. The custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. The petitioners are prepared to co-operate with the investigation.

9. While considering the scope of jurisdiction under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. v. State of Punjab [ (1980) 2 SCC 565 ] held thus:

“31. In regard to anticipatory bail, if the proposed accusation appears to stem not from motives of furthering the ends of justice but from some ulterior motive, the object being to injure and humiliate the applicant by having him arrested, a direction for the release of the applicant on bail in the event of his arrest would generally be made. On the other hand, if it appears likely, considering the antecedents of the applicant, that taking advantage of the order of anticipatory bail he will flee from justice, such an o