Court grants anticipatory bail where evidence against the accused is primarily based on suspicion.

O R D E R

This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023.

2. The petitioner is accused No. 1 in Crime No.1790 of

2025 of Sasthamcotta Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram. The offences alleged against the petitioner and the other accused are punishable under Sections 3 29 (3), 118(1), 118(2), 74 and 3(5)

and Section 62 (2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023.

3. The prosecution case, as narrated in Annexure 2, order, reads thus:-

“..on 14.10.2025 at 5.15 a.m., two persons had come on a motorcycle wearing helmet and brutally assaulted the complainant and his wife with steel rods..” [sic].

4. The case of the petitioner is that there are no credible materials to show that involvement of the petitioner and the other accused in the crime.

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

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the order dated 19.11.2025 in Crl.M.C.No.2867/2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kollam, in the application seeking anticipatory bail by accused No.2, in support of his contentions. The case of the petitioner is that he has been arrayed as an accused based on a suspicion.

7. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail plea of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has criminal antecedents. It is further submitted that the report of the Investigating Officer shows that he is a history-

sheeter.

8. The learned counsel for the petitioner countered and submitted that, whatever be the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, if there are no credible materials to connect the petitioner with the offences alleged, he is entitled to protection, as his liberty cannot be curtailed solely based on the fact that he has criminal antecedents.

9. I have gone through the Case Diary. The petitioner and the other accused have been arrayed as accused based on a suspicion. It is relevant to extract the prima facie findings recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, Kollam, in the order dated 19.11.2025 in Crl.M.C.No.2867/2025 , which reads thus:-

“The facts have already been explained. The only ground upon which the police suspected the involvement of the petitioner in the crime is that the petitioner and the 1^st accused were found within one location of mobile phone network. The petitioner says that the petitioner and the 1^st accused are having business in fishing and they were found together in Neendakara harbour. In the case diary produced, there is no material showing that the petitioner was involved in the alleged crime. There is only a vague suspicion felt against the petitioner. The petitioner has no other criminal antecedents. Under the above circumstances, the petitioner is entitled for the relief sought for.”

10. I am of the considered view that the petitioner has established a prima facie case for getting the benefits contained in Section 482 of the BNSS . Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail.

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

(a) In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the officer arresting the petitioner.

(b) Thereafter, the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturdays between 10 a.m. and 12 noon for a period of one month.

(c) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for the purpose of investigation as and when required in writing.

(d) The petitioner shall not intimidate or try to influence any of the witnesses involved in this case.

(e) The petitioner