Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 50829
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. BABU, J
JIMIL JOSE – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl. No. 13270 of 2025|Crime No. 548/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.N.C.MOHANAN
For the Respondents: SMT. M.K. PUSHPALATHA,SR.P.P
The court assessed whether the petitioners exhibited mens rea in a dispute leading to physical assault during a property-related issue.
Headnote:This application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeks bail for the accused in Crime No. 548/2025, alleging serious injuries during a property dispute. The court found a prima facie case for granting bail. The court stated the primary issue was whether the petitioners had developed mens rea. The court highlighted the circumstances indicating a potential counterblast to another FIR.
Result: Bail Application allowed with conditions.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. assessment of property-related assault allegations. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding mens rea in dispute. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's observation on prima facie case. (Para 7) |
ORDER
This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023..
2. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 respectively in Crime No.548/2025 of the Kodanadu Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 117(2) and 329(3) r/w Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. The prosecution case as narrated in Annexure A3 order reads thus:-.
“The defacto complainant and accused are neighbours. There was property dispute between the persons. The complainant has cut and removed a mahogany tree on the boundary of the property. Out of the said animosity on 06.07.2025 at about 09.30 a.m. the first accused assaulted the defacto complainant. He fell down and he has been stamped causing fracture of his ribs. The second accused has also assaulted the defacto complainant and he has beaten on the left thumb of the defacto complainant and they have also assaulted him with a wooden stick causing serious injuries to him” (sic).
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the issue arose from a civil dispute and the petitioners have not developed the mens rea in the commission of the alleged offences.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.
7. I have gone through the Case Diary. It is revealed that a property dispute existed between the parties. It is further submitted that the present crime has been registered as a counterblast to the registration of Annexure 2 FIR against the defacto complainant.
Having regard to the entire circumstances brought out, I am of the view that the petitioners could establish a prima facie case for getting the benefits contemplated in Section 482 of the BNSS .
In the result, this Bail Application is allowed as follows :-
(i) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on 10.00 a.m. on 18.11.2025 or interrogation.
(ii) The Investigating Officer is directed to release the petitioners on bail, in the event they are arrested, on their executing bond for Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum.
(iii) The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation.
(iv) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or attempt to tamper with the evidence.
(v) The petitioners shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.
(vi) If any of the bail conditions are violated by the petitioners, the Jurisdictional court will be at liberty to cancel the bail, in accordance with law.
Sd/-
