IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
SHIBURAJAN P. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 266 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.150/2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. filing application under section 482 of the bnss for bail. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments made by both applicant's counsel and prosecutor. (Para 4 , 5) |
ORDER
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 accused in Crime No.150/2025 of Excise Range Office, Kollam District. The offence alleged is punishable under Section 55 (g) of the Kerala Abkari Act .
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the applicant had prepared and kept about 100 litres of wash and equipment for distillation of liquor in a building belonging to his mother in contravention of the Abkari Act and Rules.
4. I have heard Sri. C.S. Sumesh, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri, K.A. Noushand, 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 Senior 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.
The investigation is in a preliminary stage. The custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary for the investigation. As rightly argued by the learned Senior 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/-
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.