Pre-arrest bail cannot be granted lightly; substantial involvement in a serious offense, as shown by evidence, justifies detention.

O R D E R

Dated this the 29^th day of January, 2026 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 No.2 in Crime No.2093/2025 of Fort Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District. The offence alleged is punishable under Section 306 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is as follows:-

The accused No.1 was the Assistant Manager of Alleppey Parcel Service at Attakulangara. The accused No.2 is the brother of the accused No.1. The accused persons together committed theft of clothes worth Rs.7,12,000/- from 01.04.2023 to 30.09.2025, which came to the shop where the applicant was working and thereby committed the offence.

4. I have heard Sri. Deepak Raj, 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. 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 CCTV footage perused by the investigating agency during the investigation clearly reveals the role of the applicant in the incident.

7. 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.

8. However, if the applicant appears before the Investigating Officer within one week from today, and if the Investigating Officer after interrogating him forms an opinion that he is to be arrested, after recording the arrest, he shall produce the applicant before the jurisdictional Magistrate on the same day itself. The bail application, if any filed by the applicant, shall be considered and disposed of by the jurisdictional Magistrate, in accordance with law, on the same day itself, as far as possible.

The bail application is dismissed with the above observation.

Sd/-