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) 3429

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
NOUFAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 14819 OF 2025 | CRIME NO.1602/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.K.SIJU, SMT.ANJANA KANNATH, SMT.SAFNA P.S., SHRI.GAUTHAM SIJU
For the Respondents: SMT.SREEJA V., SR. PP

The court determined that bail could be granted despite prior convictions, considering investigation status and time served.

Headnote:The court analyzed the application under Section 483 of BNSS, identifying the petitioner as the first accused in a case involving alleged assault. Despite the prosecution's stance on the applicant's culpability and prior criminal record, the court found substantial factors justifying bail due to the advanced stage of investigation and the applicant's period of detention. The court underscored that continued custody was unnecessary. Conditions for bail included cooperation with the investigation and restrictions on the applicant's activities. The application was ultimately granted.

Table of Content
1. details of the offences and events leading to the application. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments concerning the merits of the bail application. (Para 4 , 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.1602/2025 of Kannanalloor Police Station, Kollam District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 296 (b), 351(3), 118(1), 118(2), 126(2), 109(1) and 324(4) r/w Section 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the accused persons on account of enmity towards the defacto complainant’s son Ajmal, with intent to murder him on 16.11.2025 at 11.00 p.m, called upon him to Kannanalloor junction and stabbed on his abdomen, chest and face and assaulted one Ameer and Sudheer, who accompanied Ajmal, damaged their car and thereby committed the offences.

4. I have heard Sri.Siju Kamalasanan, the learned counsel for the applicant and Smt.V.Sreeja, 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

18.11.2025. The investigation is almost over and the recovery has been effected. It is true that the applicant has criminal antecedents. However, considering the stage of investigation and the period of detention he has already undergone, I am of the view that he can be released on bail. 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/-

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