Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
SAFAD – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 14747 OF 2025 | CRIME NO.1268/2025
Based on the provided legal document, the court dismissed the application for pre-arrest bail filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The court emphasized that the grant of pre-arrest bail is not to be taken lightly, especially when serious charges are involved and investigations are ongoing (!) .
The prosecution presented evidence indicating that the accused engaged in premeditated criminal behavior, including an incident where he allegedly outraged the modesty of the complainant by pulling her by the breast and conversing loudly in public, which occurred during the investigation stage (!) . The court noted that the investigation was still in a preliminary phase and that custodial interrogation of the accused was necessary to prevent potential interference with witnesses and to facilitate thorough investigation (!) .
The defense argued that there was no material connecting the accused to the crime and that he was falsely implicated, asserting his right to bail (!) . However, the court found that, given the gravity of the allegations and the need for custodial interrogation, bail could not be granted at this stage. The court reaffirmed that pre-arrest bail cannot be granted as a matter of course and that the circumstances of the case warranted the denial of bail to ensure proper investigation and prevent interference (!) (!) .
In conclusion, the application for pre-arrest bail was dismissed, emphasizing the importance of safeguarding the investigation process and the seriousness of the charges involved (!) .
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for pre-arrest bail filed. (Para 1) |
| 2. details of the allegations against the accused. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. arguments presented by both parties. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. court's observations on the necessity of custody. (Para 6 , 7) |
ORDER
This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (for short, BNSS ), seeking pre-arrest bail.
2. The applicant is the accused in Crime No.1268/2025 of Perambra Police Station, Kozhikode District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 126 (2), 74 and 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 03.11.2025 at 01.00 p.m., while the defacto complainant was on the way to Perambra bus stand with her classmates, the applicant has stopped his scooter in front of the defacto complainant and conversated her in loud voice. He insisted her to accompany him and when the same was refused by her, the applicant had pulled her by pressing on her breast, outraged her modesty and thereby committed the above offences.
4. I have heard Sri.Mansoor B.H., the learned counsel for the applicant and Smt.M.K.Pushpalatha, 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. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as part of the applicant's intentional criminal acts, and if he is released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.
6. The law regarding the grant or refusal of pre-arrest bail is well settled. Pre-arrest bail cannot be granted as a matter of course. The power under Section 482 of BNSS could be exercised only when a special case is made out, that too, recording reasons thereof. Perusal of the case diary reveals that the accusation made against the applicant is very serious in nature, and it prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on his part. There are specific allegations against the applicant in the FIS. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor submitted that three other cases are pending against the applicant which were filed on the complaint preferred by the very same victim and her father.
7. The investigation is in a preliminary stage. The custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary for the investigation. As rightly argued by the learned Public Prosecutor, the possibility of the applicant influencing the witnesses and interfering with the investigation cannot be ruled out if he is released on bail. Considering the gravity of the offence and stage of the investigation, I am of the view that this is not a fit case where the extraordinary jurisdiction vested with this Court under Section 482 of BNSS could be invoked.
The bail application is, accordingly, dismissed.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
