The principles governing anticipatory bail emphasize the presumption of innocence and the need for careful examination of circumstances surrounding the allegations.

K.BABU, J.

--------------------------------------

B.A No.13249 of 2025 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 20^th day of November, 2025 O R D E R This is an application seeking anticipatory bail filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023.

2. The petitioner is accused No.3 in Crime No.1598/2025 of Sasthamcottah Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Section s 115 (2) and 118(2) read with Section 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023.

3. The prosecution case, as narrated in Annexure A3 order, reads thus:

“There was Sports Festival as part of Onam Celebrations organized by a club on 08.09.2025. Then, the complainant had intervened in a scuffle to pacify them. Accused 1 to 3 got infuriated in the conduct of the complainant. They had jointly assaulted the complainant. The 1^st accused had struck the face of the complainant with a punching bangle in his hand. The complainant had sustained fracture of the facial bone. The 2^nd accused had pushed down the complainant. The 3^rd accused had stamped on the head of the complainant while he was lying on the ground. Accused 1 to 3 had jointly committed the above acts in furtherance of their common intention. Accused 1 and 2 have already been arrested.”[SIC]

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed the offences alleged. It is submitted that he only happened to be in a group of persons assembled in the place of occurrence in connection with Onam celebration.

6. The case of the petitioner is that, due to a mistaken identity, he has been implicated as an accused.

7. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application contending that the defacto complainant sustained severe injuries on his eyes.

8. I have gone through the Case Diary, which reveals that the overt act alleged against the petitioner is that he stabbed on the head of the defacto complainant. Admittedly, a scuffle occurred at the place of occurrence in connection with Onam celebration.

9. While considering the scope of jurisdiction under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia 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 order would not be made. But the converse of these propositions is not necessarily true. That is to say, it cannot be laid down as an inexorable rule that anticipatory bail cannot be granted unless the proposed accusation appears to be actuated by mala fides; and, equally, that anticipatory bail must be granted if there is no fear that the applicant will abscond. There are several other considerations, too numerous to enumerate, the combined effect of which must weigh with the court while granting or rejecting anticipatory bail. The nature and seriousness of the proposed charges, the context of the events likely to lead to the making of the charges, a reasonable possibility of the applicant's presence not being secured at the trial, a reasonable apprehension that witnesses will be tampered with and “the larger interests of the public or the Sta