The court affirmed the need for custodial interrogation in cases involving serious charges of premeditated criminal acts, thus denying pre-arrest bail.

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 applicants are the accused Nos. 2 and 3 in Crime No.1028/2025 of Kattakada Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 189 (1), 189(2), 191(1), 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 118(2) and 110 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023 (for short, 'the BNS ').

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the accused No.1 on 28/07/2025 at around 5.30 pm, near a waiting shed at Thunippad, Kulathummal Village, due to the reason that the defacto complainant, informed the father of the accused No.1 of an earlier assault by the accused No.1 upon him, is alleged to have verbally abused and later assaulted him using an iron rod causing fracture to his knee joint and thereby committed the offences.

4. I have heard Sri. Nikhil Sankar S., the learned counsel for the applicants and Smt. M.K. Pushpalatha, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicants with the alleged crime; hence, they are 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 applicants, and if they are 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 applicants is very serious in nature and it prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on their part. Specific overt act is alleged against the applicants. The defacto complainant has sustained serious injuries.

The investigation is in a preliminary stage. The custodial interrogation of the applicants is necessary for the investigation. As rightly argued by the learned Public Prosecutor, the possibility of the applicants influencing the witnesses and interfering with the investigation cannot be ruled out if they are 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.