The court determined that the minor nature of injuries does not necessitate custodial interrogation, thereby allowing pre-arrest bail.

ORDER

This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS ), seeking pre-arrest bail.

2. The applicants are the accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.740/2025 of Mangalam Dam Police Station, Palakkad District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 126(2) [341 IPC ], 115(2) [323 ], 118(1)[324 ], 76[354B ], 333[452 ], 324(5) [Mischief], 351(2)[506 ], 329(4) [448 ] read with Section 3(5) [34 ] of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the crime is registered on the allegation that on 11.12.2025 at about 9:30 a.m., accused Nos. 1 to 3 allegedly trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant. It is alleged that the accused No.1 took a chair from the sit-out and struck the defacto complainant on his left shoulder. When the mother-in-law of the defacto complainant attempted to intervene, she allegedly sustained injuries and her nighty was torn. It is further alleged that the infant child who was in the arms of the mother-in-law also sustained injuries during the incident. The defacto complainant further alleges that the accused No.1 was carrying a knife and a stick tucked at his waist. The allegation against accused Nos. 2 and 3 is that they threatened the injured persons and abetted the acts of the accused No.1. It is also alleged that a chain worn by the infant child was taken away by the accused.

4. I have heard Sri.S.Rajeev, the learned counsel for the applicants, Sri.M.C.Ashi, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor and Sri.T.K.Sandeep, the learned counsel for the defacto complainant. Perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the above crime. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicants with the alleged crime; hence, they are entitled to get bail. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicants, and if they are released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.

6. A reading of the FIS and the wound certificate would show that the defacto complainant or the child sustained only minor injuries. Even though there is an allegation that the accused No.1 was carrying deadly weapons, what was allegedly used for the commission of offence is only a plastic chair. The question as to whether that would fall within the weapon stated under Section 324 of Cr.P.C. is a matter of evidence. So far as the case of the prosecution regarding Section 354(B) of the Indian Penal Code is concerned, the allegation is that the accused No.1 pulled the nighty of the mother-in-law of the defacto complainant when she intervened the scuffle between the defacto complainant and the accused No.1. It is true that minor child also sustained a minor injury in the incident; but the allegation is that during the scuffle between the defacto complainant and the accused No.1, a portion of the chair fell on the body of the child. Considering the allegations made against the applicants, their custodial interrogation seems unnecessary. For these reasons, I find this to be an appropriate case to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicants.

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

(i) The applicants shall be released on bail in the event of their arrest 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 arresting officer/investigating officer, as the case may be.

(ii) The applicants shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting themselves to the deemed po