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) 50988

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
AJMAL FARSHAN K.P. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 13681 OF 2025 | S.C.No.1287 of 2021



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.SADIQUE P.P., SHRI.NAJAH EBRAHIM V.P., SHRI.MUHAMMAD SABITH
For the Respondents: SRI.M.C.ASHI, SR PP

A petitioner seeking bail must demonstrate compliance with bail conditions, and delays due to personal emergencies may mitigate strict adherence.

Headnote:This judgement relates to a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner is accused No. 2 in S.C.No.1287 of 2021, charged under Sections 22(c) and 27A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The trial court had previously granted bail with a condition to surrender his passport which the petitioner complied with, but he was remanded again for alleged non-compliance of the order regarding timeliness. The court found that the delay in surrendering the passport was not deliberate due to a personal circumstance and therefore ordered his release on bail again. The trial court is directed to release the petitioner on bail on execution of a fresh bail bond forthwith.

Table of Content
1. petition for bail under specified legal provisions. (Para 1 , 2)
2. previous bail granted with conditions. (Para 3 , 4)
3. accused's delay due to personal circumstances. (Para 5)
4. court allows bail despite delays. (Para 6)

O R D E R

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

2. The petitioner is the accused No. 2 in S.C.No.1287 of 2021 pending on the files of IVth Additional Sessions Court, Thrissur (for short, the trial court). The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 22 (c) and 27A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act , 1985.

3. The petitioner was granted regular bail by the trial court as per Annexure A1 order dated 28.10.2025 and he was released on 29.10.2025. One of the conditions in Annexure A1 bail order is that the petitioner shall surrender his passport immediately after his release from jail. According to the petitioner, he surrendered his passport on 10.11.2025. However, he was remanded by the trial court on the ground that the he did not surrender the passport as directed in time and thus violated the bail condition. It is in these circumstances that the petitioner has approached this Court seeking bail.

4. I have heard Sri. Sadique, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. M.C. Ashi, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the failure to produce the passport in time was not deliberate. It is further submitted that the petitioner’s wife was hospitalized for a surgery and hence he could not produce the passport in time.

6. The petitioner had already submitted the passport. Hence, I am of the view that he can be ordered to be released.

The trial court is directed to release the petitioner on bail on execution of a fresh bail bond forthwith.

The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the trial court through e-mail.

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