Personal liberty is a fundamental right. Bail should be granted unless there are substantial grounds for its denial, balancing public interest and individual rights.

K.BABU, J.

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

B.A. No.13890 of 2025 ---------------------------------------------

Dated this the 27^th day of November, 2025 O R D E R This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNNS), 2023.

2. The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.642/2025 of Kenichira Police Station, Wayanad. The offence alleged against the petitioner is punishable under Section 103 (1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita ( BNS ), 2023.

3. The case of the petitioner, as narrated in Annexure A1 order, reads thus:-

“.. the accused, due to her previous enmity towards her husband Chandran stemming from his habitual assault and harassment after consuming alcohol, and his act of scolding and threatening to kill her upon her return on 13/09/2025 from a tour with colleagues conducted between 10/09/2025 and 13/09/2025 without his permission, on 14/09/2025 at 00.30 hours, with the intention and preparation to commit his murder, had stabbed him with a broken piece of tile on his head while he was sleeping in the bedroom located on the north-western corner of their house bearing door No.XIII/491A of the Pulpally Grama Panchayath situated at Karyambathikunnu in Nadavayal amsom and thereby committed Mariticide.” [sic]

4. The petitioner was arrested on 15.09.2025 and she has been in judicial custody since then.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Pubic Prosecutor.

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

7. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor opposed the bail plea of the petitioner on the ground that the offence alleged is very grave in nature.

8. The petitioner is a lady. The weapon allegedly used is a broken piece of tile. The Case Diary reveals that the investigation is practically over.

9. The principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception has been well recognised by judicial pronouncements. This is the principle underlined in Article

21 of the Constitution of India .

10. There cannot be an inexorable formula in the matter of granting bail. The facts and circumstances of each case will govern the exercise of judicial discretion in granting or cancelling bail. {Vide: Gurcharan Singh v.

State (Delhi Admn.) [(1978) 1 SCC 118] }.

11. The issue of bail is one of liberty, justice, public safety and burden of the public treasury, all of which insist that a developed jurisprudence of bail is integral to a socially sensitised judicial process. Personal liberty, deprived when bail is refused, is too precious a value of our constitutional system recognised under Article 21 that the curial power to negate it is a great trust exercisable, not casually but judicially, with lively concern for the cost to the individual and the community. After all, personal liberty of an accused or convict is fundamental, suffering lawful eclipse only in terms of “procedure established by law” {Vide: Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. State [(1978) 1 SCC

240]}.

12. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe mor