Pre-arrest bail is not granted as a matter of course; refusal is justified when serious allegations necessitate custodial interrogation.

O R D E R

This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS ), seeking pre-arrest bail.

2. The applicants are the accused Nos.1 and 3 in Crime No.962/2025 of Mathilakam Police Station, Thrissur District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1) and 110 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 20.10.2025 at about 09:00 p.m., accused Nos.1 to 5 on account of previous enmity, with an intention to cause hurt to him, wrongfully restrained him while the defacto complainant and his friend were travelling on a motor cycle and voluntarily caused hurt to him with a granite stone. Thus, the applicants are alleged to have committed the aforesaid offences.

4. I have heard Sri. D. Vimal Dev, 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. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as part of the applicants' intentional criminal acts, and if they are 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 underSection 482ofBNSScould 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 applicants is very serious in nature, and it prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on their part. Specific overt acts have been alleged against the applicants. The wound certificate would show that the friend of the defacto complainant sustained injury on the attack in the incident.

7. The investigation is in a preliminary stage. The custodial interrogation of the applicants is necessary for the investigation. As rightly argued by the learned Senior Public Prosecutor, the possibility of the applicants influencing the witnesses and interfering with the investigation cannot be ruled out if they are 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/-