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) 7488

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
AJESH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 610 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: K.C. Sudheer
For the Respondents: Smt. Sreeja V.

Applicants were granted bail due to insufficient evidence connecting them to the alleged crime.

Headnote:This bail application, filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, concerns applicants accused in Crime No.789/2025 under the NDPS Act. The court found insufficient grounds for continued detention, noting the quantity of the seized substances and the criminal background of the accused. Core issues involved bail eligibility and the sufficiency of evidence against the applicants. The court reasoned that the applicants were entitled to bail due to lack of substantial evidence linking them to the crime. They were released on bail with conditions including cooperation with investigations and restrictions on contacting witnesses.

Table of Content
1. application for bail under bnss. (Para 1 , 2)
2. accused alleged to possess narcotic substances. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court's observations on bail merits. (Para 5)

ORDER

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

2. The applicants are the accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.789/2025 of Pattanakkadu Police Station, Alappuzha District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 20 (b)(ii)(A) and 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act , 1985 (for short, NDPS Act).

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the accused No.1 along with the applicants were found in possession of 1.29 grams of MDMA and 7.41 grams of ganja for sale in contravention of the NDPS Act and Rules and thereby committed the offences.

4. I have heard Sri.Sudheer K.C., the learned counsel for the applicants and Smt.Sreeja V., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicants with the alleged crime; hence, they are 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 applicants, and they are not entitled to bail at this stage.

6. The applicants were remanded to judicial custody on 29.12.2025. The case record would show that ganja was seized from the possession of applicant No.2. However, the quantity is only 7.41 grams. Nothing has been seized from the possession of the applicant No.1. The recovery has been effected. The investigation is almost over. Applicant No.1 is having a criminal antecedent. He is involved in an offence under Section 27(b) of the NDPS Act. However, it is for the consumption of narcotic drugs. Applicant No.2 is not involved in any other crimes of similar nature. For these reasons, I do not find any reason to hold that the continued detention of the applicants is required for any purpose. Hence, the applicants are entitled to be released on bail.

In the result, the application is allowed on the following conditions: -

(i) The applicants shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) each with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Magistrate/Court.

(ii) The applicants shall fully co-operate with the investigation.

(iii) The applicants shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m every Saturday until further orders. They shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.

(iv) The applicants shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.

(v) The applicants shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation. (vi) The applicants shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.

(vii) The application, if any, for deletion/modification of the bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of violating the bail conditions shall be filed at the jurisdictional court. Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE

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