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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 1402

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
BIJU MON – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 104 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.KURIAN ANTONY MATHEW, SRI.ARUN THOMAS, SMT.VEENA RAVEENDRAN, SMT.KARTHIKA MARIA, SRI.ANIL SEBASTIAN PULICKEL, SHRI.MATHEW NEVIN THOMAS, SHRI.KARTHIK RAJAGOPAL, SHRI.SHINTO MATHEW ABRAHAM, SMT.APARNNA S., SHRI.NOEL NINAN NINAN, SMT.ANNA MARY MATHEW, SHRI.ADEEN NAZAR, SHRI.ARUN JOSEPH MATHEW, SHRI.ROHAN MATHEW
For the Respondents: SRI.M.C.ASHI, SR. PP.

The court denied bail due to the seriousness and premeditation of the alleged crime, viewing the applicant's claim of innocence with skepticism.

Headnote:This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail. The applicant, an accused in Crime No. 1745/2025, argues innocence despite serious accusations stemming from a premeditated criminal act. Issues of gravity and complicity are deliberated. The bail application is dismissed.

Table of Content
1. application for bail filed. (Para 1)
2. nature of accusations and crime. (Para 2 , 3)
3. arguments for and against bail. (Para 4 , 5)

ORDER

This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS ) seeking regular bail.

2. The applicant is the accused in Crime No. 1745/2025 of Kattappana Police Station, Idukki District. The offence alleged was punishable under Sections 124 (1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, the BNS ). During the period of investigation, the victim passed away and therefore Section 124 (1) of was substituted with Section 103 (1) of the .

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 03.11.2025 at 10.30 pm, the deceased reached in front of the applicant's house at Valiyapara Bhagam, Kattappana Village and abused the applicant and his family by hurling filthy and abusive words against them. At that time, the applicant threw hot water mixed with chilly powder on the deceased thereby injuring him. The deceased was taken to Kottayam Medical College and during the course of treatment, he passed away on 10.11.2025 and thereby the applicant has committed the offence.

4. I have heard Sri. Kurian Antony Mathew, 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 bail. On the other hand, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicant, and he is not entitled to bail at this stage.

The applicant was remanded to judicial custody on

5.11.2025. A perusal of the case diary would reveal that the accusation against the applicant is very serious, and it prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on his part. Considering the nature of the crime, the gravity of the offence, the complicity of the applicant in it, and the facts and circumstances mentioned above, I am of the view that the applicant cannot be released on bail at this stage. The bail application, accordingly, is dismissed.

Sd/-

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