SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 55579

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
M.B SNEHALATHA, J
Santhosh Varkey @ Arattannan v. State of Kerala
Bail Application | Crime No.160/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners:Learned Counsel for the petitioner
For the Respondents: Learned Public Prosecutor

The court emphasized the need for conditions to ensure the integrity of the investigation while granting bail in cases involving social media defamation.

Headnote:This Bail Application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.160/2025 alleging offences under different sections including S.75(1)(iv) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and others. The court found that granting bail will not impede the investigation. Significant conditions were set for the same. The court concluded with specific bail conditions to be adhered to by the petitioner.

Table of Content
1. bail application under specific sections of bnss and allegations outlined. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments for and against bail application considered. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. court's justification for granting bail with conditions. (Para 7 , 8)

1. This Bail Application is filed under S.483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 ( BNSS ).

2. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.160/2025 of Ernakulam North Police Station, Ernakulam. The above case is registered against petitioner alleging offences punishable under S.75(1)(iv), S.75(3) and S.79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita ( BNS ), 2023. S.67 of the Information Technology Act , 2000 and S.120(o) of the Kerala Police Act , 2011.

3. The prosecution case is that, on 20/04/2025, the petitioner made a facebook post stating that "All the ladies in the Cinema Industry are prostitutes". The crime was registered based on a complaint made by the defacto complainant, who is an actress.

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

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner / accused submitted that even if the entire allegation against the accused are true, the Section of offences levelled against the accused will not lie. It was further submitted that accused is in judicial custody from 20/04/2025 and his further detention is not necessitated.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application on the ground that the investigation is in the initial stage; that if he is released on bail, he will again involve in similar offences. The learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that if accused is granted bail he may free from justice.

7. The materials produced by the prosecution would, prima facie show that accused made disparaging and defamatory statement against woman in the film industry in his facebook post as alleged by the prosecution.

8. Making disparaging statement about woman on social media is a form of online harassment and it constitute defamation and it is an insult to the modesty of a woman. Publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form is an offence under the Information Technology Act . Despite the penal laws these infractions continue to rise. Accused is in judicial custody from 25/04/2025. Regard being had period of detention undergone and the progress made in the investigation, this Court is of the view that, grant of bail will not cause any impediment in the process of investigation and a fair and full probe can be well ensured by granting bail to the petitioner by imposing necessary conditions. Accordingly, Bail is granted to the petitioner on the following conditions: -

1. The petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like - sum to the satisfaction of this Court.

2. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday in between 10 a.m and 12 noon for a period of three months or till final report is filed whichever is earlier.

3. The petitioner shall not influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

4. Petitioner shall not involve in any offence of similar nature while on bail.

5. Immediately on release he shall delete all the offfensive messages and refrain from making any vituperative or disparaging comments against women in any of the social media platform.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top