Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 57464
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. BABU, J
PS KRISHNADAS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 12074 OF 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.P.V.UTTARA, SMT.SHILPA SOMAN
For the Respondents: ADV M C ASHI, SR PP, ADV SWETHA R
An application under Section 482 for bail can be denied if allegations are grave and no extraordinary circumstances are presented.
Headnote:This judgment concerns an application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner, accused in Crime No. 1061/2025, asserted exceptional circumstances for approaching the Court directly, citing difficulties in securing legal representation. The Court reviewed the allegations against the petitioner, which involved harassment and making sexually colored remarks toward the victim. The Court found the allegations grave, denying the petitioner's request for bail under extraordinary circumstances. The bail application stands dismissed verbatim.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application filed under section 482 of bnss. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. accused charged with serious offences. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court denies bail due to serious allegations. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
ORDER
This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (for short, ‘ BNSS ’).
2. The petitioner has directly approached this Court without moving an application before the Sessions Court concerned.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that, as the victim in the case is a lawyer practicing in the Palakkad Bar Association, no lawyers practicing there are willing to accept his vakalat. Thus, the petitioner has placed an exceptional circumstance for making an application under Section 482 of BNSS directly before this Court.
4. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1061 /2025 of Palakkad Town North Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 78 and 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023 and Sections 119 (a) and 119(b) of the Kerala Police Act , 2011.
5. The prosecution case is as follows:
On 09.09.2025, at about 18:50 hours, the defacto complainant boarded a private bus, namely ‘Kandath Motors,’
from the Stadium Bus Stand, Palakkad. The accused also boarded the same bus, sat on the rear seat, and tried to take the complainant’s photograph. When she questioned him, the petitioner made sexually coloured remarks towards her. The petitioner also harassed the complainant by making unwelcome and sexually coloured comments and by requesting sexual favours.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned for the defacto complainant/victim and the learned Public Prosecutor.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the ingredients of the offences under Section 75 of the BNS are not attracted from the allegations.
8. The learned Public Prosecutor produced the Case Diary. I have gone through the Case Diary, which reveals that the petitioner demanded sexual favours from the defacto complainant and also made sexually coloured remarks. The offences alleged are grave in nature. The petitioner is not entitled to the extraordinary remedy under Section 482 of BNSS .
In the result, the bail application stands dismissed.
