Pre-arrest bail is inappropriate when serious charges are present and custodial interrogation is deemed necessary.

ORDER

This application is filed u/s 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (for short, 'the BNSS ') seeking pre-arrest bail.

2. The applicant is the sole accused in Crime No.2188/2025 of Adoor Police Station, Pathanamthitta. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 296 (b), 115(2), 117(2), 110 and 118(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on

06/10/2025 at about 1.30 pm, at a place namely Nellumukal Elayilpadi, hurling obscene words and intimidating the defacto complainant, the applicant had beaten behind the head and nose of the defacto complainant causing fracture of nasal bone. When the wife of the defacto complainant tried to take him to hospital, the applicant had pelted a stone at the head of the defacto complainant, causing fracture of skull and thereby committed the offences.

4. I have heard Smt. Vidya G. Nair, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri. M.C. Ashi, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicant with the alleged crime; hence, he is entitled to get bail. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicant, and if he is released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.

6. The law regarding the grant or refusal of pre-

arrest bail is well settled. Pre-arrest bail cannot be granted as a matter of course. The power u/s 482 of BNSS could be exercised only when a special case is made out, that too, recording reasons thereof. Perusal of the case diary reveals that the accusation made against the applicant is very serious in nature and it prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on his part. Specific overt act has been alleged against the applicant. The wound certificate and discharge summary would show that the defacto complainant has sustained serious injuries including fracture.

The investigation is in a preliminary stage. The custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary for the investigation. As rightly argued by the learned Public Prosecutor, the possibility of the applicant influencing the witnesses and interfering with the investigation cannot be ruled out if he is released on bail. Considering the gravity of the offence and stage of the investigation, it is not a fit case where extra ordinary jurisdiction vested with this Court u/s 482 of BNSS could be invoked. The bail application is, accordingly, dismissed.