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) 48604

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. Babu, J
ANEESH KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Application No. 12974 of 2025 | Crime No. 795/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.P.T.SHEEJISH, SRI. HARIKIRAN M., SMT.SANDRA TOM, SHRI.YOOSUF SAFWAN T. AJMAL, SHRI.ARAVIND R. NAIR, SMT.PARVATHI
For the Respondents: SRI. M. C. ASHI, SR PP

Court denied bail due to preliminary investigation status and potential witness tampering risk.

Headnote:This judgment concerns an application for bail filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner, charged under Section 74 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 8 r/w Section 7 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, argued for bail based on time spent in custody. However, the court found that the investigation is at a preliminary stage and that there is a risk of witness tampering. Consequently, bail was denied.

Table of Content
1. facts of the case and alleged offenses. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. arguments for and against bail. (Para 6 , 7)
3. court discusses investigation status. (Para 8)
4. final ruling on bail application. (Para 9)

ORDER

This is an application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023.

2. The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.795/2025 of Kaipamangalam Police Station, Thrissur. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Section 7 4 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita ( BNS ), 2023 and Section 8 r/w Section 7 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO), 2012.

3. The prosecution case as narrated in Annexure A1 order reads thus:-

“..On 03.10.2025 at 21.00 hours, the accused sexually assaulted the surivivor girl aged 14 years by touching on her shoulder and prseeing on her breast at the house of her relative in Kaipamangalam. Therefore the offences under section 74 BNS and 8 r/w 7 of the Protectionof Children from Sexual Offences Act.” [sic]

4. The petitioner was arrested on 05.10.2025 and he has been in judicial custody since then.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Pubic Prosecutor.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that having regard to the tenure of judicial custody undergone by the petitioner, he is entitled to be released on bail.

7. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail plea of the petitioner on the ground that the investigation is only in the preliminary stage. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application further on the ground that the petitioner will threaten and influence the witnesses, if he is released on bail at this stage.

8. I have gone through the Case Diary which reveals that the investigation is only in the preliminary stage.

9. Having regard to the stage of investigation and the gravity of the offences, the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail.

The Bail Application stands dismissed.

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