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) 2278

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
GEORGEKUTTY JOSEPH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 406 OF 2026|BAIL APPL. NO. 14663 OF 2025|CRIME NO.1023/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.JITHIN BABU A, SRI.ARUN SAMUEL, SRI.K.A.NIDHIN, SRI.ANOOD JALAL K.J.
For the Respondents: SRI.M.C.ASHI, SR. PP.

The Court established that insufficient evidence justifies granting bail, especially when similar co-accused have been released.

Headnote:The applications are filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by accused Nos. 9 and 10 seeking regular bail. The Court determined that there was insufficient evidence to deny bail, emphasizing the need for the applicants' continued detention. Findings revealed that previous co-accused had been granted bail, which influenced the decision to grant bail under specific conditions to the applicants.

Result: The applications are allowed on specified conditions.

Table of Content
1. summary of alleged crime and co-accused actions. (Para 2)
2. court observations leading to bail decision. (Para 4)
3. arguments regarding bail entitlement and implications. (Para 5)

O R D E R

These applications are filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (for short, BNSS )

seeking regular bail.

2. The applicant in B.A. No.14663/2025 is accused No.9 and the applicant in B.A. No.406/2026 is accused No.10 in Crime No.1023/2025 of Mannuthy Police Station, Thrissur District. The offence alleged is punishable under Section 3 09 (6) read with (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023 (for short ‘ BNS ’).

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 25.10.2025 at

4.35 a.m., accused Nos.1 to 9, in furtherance of the common object, assaulted the defacto complainant in front of CD medicals in Mannuthy and committed theft of a bag containing Rs.75,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy five lakhs only) and thereby committed the above said offences.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned Public Prosecutors. 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 bail. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutors submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicants, and they are not entitled to bail at this stage.

6. Accused No.9 was remanded to judicial custody on

30.10.2025 and accused No.10 was remanded to judicial custody on 28.11.2025. The investigation is almost over. The co-accused, who were standing on the same footing as that of the applicants, were already granted bail as evidenced from the annexures produced. For these reasons, I do not find any reason to hold that the continued detention of the applicants is required for any purpose. Hence, the applicants are entitled to be released on bail.

In the result, the applications are allowed on the following conditions: -

(i) The applicants shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) each with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Magistrate/Court.

(ii) The applicants shall fully co-operate with the investigation.

(iii) The applicants shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m every Saturday until further orders. They shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.

(iv) The applicants shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.

(v) The applicants shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

(vi) The applicants shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.

(vii) The application, if any, for deletion/modification of the bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of violating the bail conditions shall be filed at the jurisdictional court.

Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE NP APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. NO. 406 OF 2026 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.

1023/2025 OF MANNUTHY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR.

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