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) 5516

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
JAYAKUMAR M R @ AJI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 299 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.886/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.ANANDHU SATHEESH, SMT.SREEDEVI S., SHRI.AJIL V. RAJAN, SMT.DRISYA DILEEP
For the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ADDL.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION SRI.C.K.SURESH, SPL. GP

The court emphasized the seriousness and premeditated nature of the crime, justifying the denial of bail.

Headnote:This application concerns a plea for regular bail filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner is accused of stabbing family members during a domestic dispute. The court, after reviewing the serious nature of the charges, emphasized the premeditated nature of the crime, leading to the dismissal of the bail application. The key issue was whether the applicant was entitled to bail, which was determined against the applicant given the gravity of the accusation.

Table of Content
1. details of the alleged crime. (Para 2)
2. arguments for and against bail. (Para 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 sole accused in Crime No.886/2025 of Koipuram Police Station, Pathanamthitta District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 332 (a), 109 and 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

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

02.08.2025 at about 9:00 p.m., following a domestic quarrel, the applicant inflicted stab injuries on his wife, her father and her sister. The wife later succumbed to the injuries, while the other two injured persons survived after medical treatment and thereby committed the offences.

4. I have heard Sri.Anandhu Satheesh, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.C.K.Suresh, the learned Special Government Pleader. 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 Special Government Pleader 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

07.08.2025. 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. The applicant brutally killed his own wife and caused serious injuries to his father-in-law and sister-in-law of his wife. 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