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) 5084

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
RAVEESH KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 419 OF 2026 | S.C.No.102/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.SHAJU M.S., SHRI.R.PRASANTH KUMAR
For the Respondents: SMT.SREEJA V., SR. PP

Bail applications related to serious narcotic offenses necessitate careful consideration of evidence and accused's past conduct.

Headnote:This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail for the applicant, an accused in a narcotic drugs case. The applicant claims innocence and argues lack of evidence connecting him to the crime, while the prosecution contends the accused is involved in premeditated criminal acts. The court found the applicant's involvement serious and dismissed the bail application.

Table of Content
1. application for bail under applicable sections. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments presented by both parties. (Para 4 , 5)

ORDER

This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (for short, BNSS )

seeking regular bail.

2. The applicant is arrayed as accused No.2 in S.C.No.102/2025 on the files of the Special Court for NDPS Act cases, Vatakara in Crime No.742/2025 of Koduvally Police Station, Kozhikode District. The offences alleged are punishable under Section 22 (c) read with Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act , 1985 (for short, the NDPS Act)

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

14.11.2024, the officers of Koduvally police while on patrol duty, found the accused No.1 in possession of 60.29 gms of MDMA in contravention of the NDPS Act and Rules.

4. I have heard Sri. M.S. Shaju, 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. 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.

The applicant was formally arrested on 28.4.2025. A perusal of the case diary would reveal that the accusation against the applicant is very serious, and it prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on his part. He was granted bail by this Court for ten days to perform his own marriage on 16.6.2025. However, he absconded and he was arrested after five months on 27.11.2025. Since then he is in custody. That apart, he is involved in four other crimes of similar nature. Considering the nature of the crime, the gravity of the offence, the complicity of the applicant in it, and the facts and circumstances mentioned above, I am of the view that the applicant cannot be released on bail at this stage. The bail application, accordingly, is 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