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) 4235

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
ROJOY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 14446 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.NIREESH MATHEW, SRI.VIVEK VENUGOPAL, SRI.BABU JOSE, SHRI.GAJENDRA SINGH RAJPUROHIT, SHRI.AKHIL GEORGE, SHRI.ATHUL POULOSE
For the Respondents: SRI.K.A.NOUSHAD, SR. PP

The criteria for granting bail include the duration of custody, the nature of the accused's actions, and cooperation with the ongoing investigation.

Headnote:This bail application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking regular bail. The applicant is accused in Crime No.1551/2025 regarding intimidation and causing injuries to the complainant. The applicant's counsel argues innocence and lack of connection to the crime, while the prosecution emphasizes the intentional nature of the act. The applicant has been in custody for two months, and the investigation is nearly complete. The court grants bail with specified conditions to ensure cooperation and prevent interference.

Table of Content
1. allegations of intimidation and injury by the accused. (Para 2)
2. arguments presented by the counsel and prosecution. (Para 4 , 5)
3. criteria for granting bail and conditions imposed. (Para 6)

O R D E R

Dated this the 29th day of January, 2026 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 in Crime No.1551/2025 of Pudukkad Police Station, Thrissur District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 126 (2), 118(1), 118(2), 105 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023.

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

19.11.2025 at 05:00 p.m, on the way to the house of the de facto complainant, due to previous animosity, the applicant armed with a chopping knife ran towards him, intimidated to kill him and cut him with that weapon on his legs. The injured fell in the drain, applicant again cut him on his head and thereby caused injury there. Had the de facto complainant not evaded this attack, it would have caused serious injuries to his vital parts and may resulted into his death. Thus, the applicant is alleged to have committed the aforesaid offences.

4. I have heard Sri. Nireesh Mathew, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri. K.A.Noushad, 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 21.11.2025. The victim sustained blunt injuries to both lower limbs in the incident at the hands of the applicant. He was hospitalized and later on discharged on 03.12.2025. Later on, he succumbed to the injuries on 10.12.2025. The copy of the postmortem certificate furnished by the learned Senior Public Prosecutor would show that the death was due to Pulmonary Thrombo- Embolism due to Deep Vein Thrombosis and Pneumonia due to the blunt injuries sustained to both lower limbs. The Doctor, who conducted autopsy, also stated so. However, whether the death was due to blunt injuries sustained by the victim in the incident or not, is a matter of evidence. The applicant is in custody for the last two months. The investigation is almost over. The 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 ba

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