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) 2855

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
VIGNESH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 267 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.975/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sri.Sarath Babu Kottakkal
For the Respondents: Smt.M.K.Pusphalatha, SR.PP

The court determined that in the absence of serious evidence of guilt, bail should be granted to a petitioner with no prior criminal history under stipulated conditions.

Headnote:This application pertains to bail filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by the petitioner accused No.1 for regular bail in Crime No.975/2025. The prosecution alleges that the applicant, along with others, wrongfully restrained and injured the de facto complainant. The court, finding insufficient evidence to continue detention, allowed the bail application subject to conditions. The court's primary concern was the lack of serious criminal antecedents against the applicant.

Result: The application is allowed with bail conditions.

Table of Content
1. details of alleged crime against the applicant. (Para 2 , 3)
2. arguments presented by both sides regarding bail. (Para 5)

O R D E R

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 No.1 in Crime No.975/2025 of Nedupuzha Police Station, Thrissur District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 115 (2), 118(1), 351(3) and 109(1) read with Section 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023 (for short ‘ BNS ’).

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 17.12.2025 at about 9.00 p.m., the applicant, along with the remaining accused, came in motorbikes, wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant and his friends, voluntarily caused hurt to them with deadly weapons and thereby committed the offences.

4. I have heard Sri.Sarath Babu Kottakkal, 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. 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.

6. The applicant was remanded to judicial custody on

19.12.2025. Even though a specific overt act has been alleged against the applicant, admittedly, he did not use any weapon. It was accused Nos.2, 4 and 9 who used the weapon. The investigation is almost over and recovery has been effected. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. For these reasons, I do not find any reason to hold that the continued detention of the applicant is required for any purpose. Hence, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

In the result, the application is allowed on the following conditions: -

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

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

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

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

(v) The applicant 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 applicant 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. 267 OF 2026 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 07.01.2026 IN CRL MC. NO 2370/2025 OF THE IV ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, 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