The court allowed bail despite grave charges, emphasizing the balance between liberty and judicial process.

O R D E R

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

2. The petitioner is accused No.4 in Crime No.269/2017 of Crime Branch, Thrissur Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Section s 120B , 143, 148, 449, 323, 326, 307, 302, 201 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3 (2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 .

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

“In prosecution of the criminal conspiracy to commit murder of deceased SunilKumar and in furtherance of the common intention on 04.12.1994 at 02.00 p.m, the accused persons trespassed into the house and commit murder of Sunilkumar and when his brother Subramanian intervened, his left hand was chopped and when other members of the family intervened, they were also terribly injured accused committed.” [sic.]

4. The petitioner was arrested on 31.08.2025 and he has been in judicial custody since then.

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

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the investigation is practically over and his further detention is not required.

7. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail plea of the petitioner on the ground that the offences alleged are grave in nature. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor further submitted that the investigation is almost at its final stage. It is also submitted that all the other arrested accused have been released on bail.

8. The learned Sessions Judge rejected the petitioner’s application for regular bail on the ground that he had been in exile for a long period, in the sense that he had been living in the Middle East.

9. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner never absconded, as recorded by the learned Sessions Judge. It is submitted that the initial investigation in the crime was completed long back, in 1996, and some of the accused were found not guilty of the offences alleged. Based on the directions of this Court, a further investigation was conducted, and the petitioner was implicated thereafter.

Concededly, at the time when the petitioner was sought to be implicated, he was in the Gulf, and later, with the progress of the investigation, he was brought to India. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has never intentionally eluded from the process of trial or investigation. He is prepared to co-operate with the investigation.

10. Having regard to the entire circumstances, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail on conditions.

In the result, the Bail Application is allowed as follows:

(a) The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court below.

(b) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays and Fridays between 10:00 A.M. and 11.00 A.M. for a period of three months or till the final report is filed, whichever is earlier.

(c) The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the jurisdictional Court.

(d) The petitioner shall surrender his passport before the jurisdictional Court. If the petitioner has no passport, he shall file an affidavit within two weeks after his release.

(e) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or attempt to tamper with the evidence.

(f) The petitioner shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.

(g) If any of the bail conditions are viola