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) 5555

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
HRISHIKESH DAMODAR – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 305 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.18/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.K.P.PRASANTH, SHRI.T.A.AJMAL HUSSAIN, SHRI.ARUNRAJ S., SMT.SUNITHA K.G., SMT.ANITHA V.A., SMT.SREELAKSHMI K.
For the Respondents: N.JAGATH, SC, DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE - DRI

The court underscored the gravity of narcotic-related offences and the applicant's criminal history as justification for denying bail.

Headnote:This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail. The applicant, accused No.2, is implicated in a serious crime involving narcotics as per the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The prosecution alleges involvement in a conspiracy related to a significant drug haul. The court found insufficient evidence to connect the applicant directly, citing serious nature and previous criminal activities as grounds for denial of bail. The final verdict dismisses the bail application.

Table of Content
1. application for bail under bnss and allegations of serious drug charges. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments presented for and against bail, including claims of innocence. (Para 4 , 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 accused No.2 in O.R.

No.18/2025 of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Kochi. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 23 (b) read with 8(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act , 1985 (for short, the NDPS Act).

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the accused No.4 was found in possession of 2.008 kgs of ganja on 4.12.2025 at the Cochin International Airport in contravention of the NDPS Act and Rules. According to the prosecution, the remaining accused including the applicant conspired and brought the contraband from Thailand.

4. I have heard Sri. K.P. Prasanth, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri. N. Jagath, the learned Standing Counsel. 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 Standing Counsel 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

04.12.2025. 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. Moreover the applicant has criminal antecedents and he is recently involved in a similar crime. 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