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) 3450

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
ASHIK – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 228 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.967/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sri.V.A.Johnson (Varikkappallil)
For the Respondents: Smt.Sreeja V., SR. PP

Pre-arrest bail under BNSS can only be granted upon special circumstances being established. The gravity of allegations and the stage of investigation are crucial.

Headnote:This application for pre-arrest bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) is filed by the sole accused in Crime No.967/2025 facing serious allegations. The application was dismissed as the court found prima facie evidence indicating the applicant's premeditated criminal acts and the need for custodial interrogation. The court determined that the case against the applicant raised serious accusations warranting refusal of bail to prevent influence on the investigation, stating, 'this is not a fit case where the extraordinary jurisdiction... could be invoked.' The request for bail is thereby denied.

Table of Content
1. details of the pre-arrest bail application and underlying incidents. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments presented by both parties regarding bail. (Para 4 , 5)
3. court findings on the seriousness of the allegations and necessity of investigation. (Para 6 , 7)

O R D E R

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 sole accused in Crime No.967/2025 of Alathur Police Station, Palakkad District. The offences alleged are punishable under Section s 126 (2), 115(2) and 118(2) read with Section 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ BNS ’).

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 22.08.2025 at

22.30 hours, near Thekkumuri Bus Stop, due to animosity from an argument between the father of the applicant and the defacto complainant during the last Kadampady vow festival, the applicant wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant who was coming on a bike and hit him on the face with an iron punch, thereby causing a fracture to the nasal bone and serious injury. When the friend of the defacto complainant tried to defend him, the applicant kicked him in the stomach, causing injury. Thus, the applicant has committed the aforementioned offences.

4. I have heard Sri.V.A.Johnson (Varikkappallil), the learned counsel for the applicant and Smt.Sreeja V., 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 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. Specific overt act has been alleged against the applicant. The defacto complainant sustained nasal bone fracture in the incident.

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.

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