Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 51223
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
STATE OF KERALA – Appellant
Versus
UMESH R – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 4322 OF 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: A.VIPIN NARAYAN
For the Respondents: SHRI.KRISHNANUNNI G.B.
The court upheld bail previously granted, emphasizing adherence to bail conditions unless violated.
Headnote:This case addresses a petition by the State under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking the cancellation of bail granted to the respondent, who was accused of serious offenses. The court found no grounds to support the cancellation as the respondent adhered to bail conditions. The case highlights the court's discretion regarding bail in serious offenses and reinforces adherence to bail conditions by the accused. Ultimately, the Crl.M.C was dismissed, affirming the bail unless violated.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition filed under section 528 for bail cancellation. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. accused released on bail was compliant. (Para 2) |
| 3. court found no grounds to cancel bail, case dismissed. (Para 4 , 5) |
ORDER
Dated : 12th November, 2025 This is a petition filed by the State, represented by the learned Public Prosecutor, under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 , ( BNSS ), praying for cancelling the bail granted to the respondent/accused by quashing Annexure A1 order dated 11.3.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.1852/2025 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge-I (Special Court), Pathanamthitta.
2. The respondent was the accused in crime No.45/2025 of Elavumthitta police station. The offences alleged against him are under Sections 6 4(1), 137(l)(b), 137(2) of BNS, 4 r/w 3(a), 6 r/w 5(1) of the PoCSO Act and 3(1)W(i) of SC/ST (PoA) Act. The respondent was arrested on 13.1.2025 and was remanded to judicial custody. As per the order in Crl.M.P.No.1987/2025 dated 14.3.2025, he was released on bail by the Additional Sessions Judge-I (Special Court), Pathanamthitta.
3. According to the petitioner, since the offences alleged against the respondent are very serious and heinous in nature, the Additional Sessions Judge was not justified in releasing him on bail. Therefore, the petitioner prays for cancelling the bail granted to the respondent.
4. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor on behalf of the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.
5. The respondent was arrested on 13.1.2025 and was released on bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge as per order dated 11.3.2025, subject to strict conditions. The petitioner has no case that the respondent has not complied the above bail conditions, so far. Now the final report is also filed in this case. In the above circumstances, I find no valid grounds to cancel the bail granted to the respondent. Therefore, this Crl.M.C praying for cancelling the bail granted to the respondent is liable to be dismissed. In the result, this Crl.M.C is dismissed.
However, it is made clear that in case the respondent violates the bail conditions, the petitioner can approach the learned Sessions Judge, for appropriate reliefs.
