Custodial interrogation not warranted where no prior offences exist against the accused and allegations require scrutiny under laid down provisions.

O R D E R

This is an application seeking anticipatory bail filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023.

2. The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.13/2026 of Peerumedu Police Station, Idukki District. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 126 (2), 118(1) and 115(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023 (for short, 'the BNS ').

3. The prosecution allegation is that due to a previous animosity towards the defacto complainant, the petitioner who is the lover of the defacto complainant's husband, wrongfully restrained her on 14/1/2026 at about 3:30 pm while she was going to her job at a convent situated at Pambanar kara, through Pazhaya Pambanar road in a motorcycle which was ridden by the husband of the defacto complainant. Thereafter, the petitioner caught hold of defacto complainant's hair and assaulted her and thereby committed the aforementioned offences.

4. Heard Sri.Rohith R., the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.K.A.Noushad, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the accusations against the petitioner are absolutely baseless. According to the learned counsel, the ingredients to attract an offence under Section 118 (1) of the BNS , which is the only non-bailable offence attributed against the petitioner, are wanting in this case. On the said premise, it was urged that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.

6. Per-contra, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor opposed the application by highlighting the serious nature of the offence attributed to the petitioner. From the available records, it is discernible that the main overt act attributed to the petitioner is that she caught hold of the tuft of the defacto complainant and attempted to hit her head against a tarred road during the course of the scuffle.

7. Of course, the allegation against the petitioner is a serious one.

The motive alleged is that the petitioner maintained an unholy relationship with the defacto complainant's husband and hence, she bore an animosity towards the defacto complainant.

8. Admittedly, the petitioner is a lady aged 50 years. No criminal antecedents have been pointed out against her. Likewise there is no allegation that the petitioner used any weapon in the commission of the offence. The nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner suggests that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is unwarranted for the progress of the investigation in this case.

Having regard to all the aforesaid aspects, I am inclined to allow this application with the following conditions:

1. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 days from today and shall undergo interrogation.

2. After interrogation, if the Investigating Officer proposes to arrest the petitioner, she shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.50,000/— (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer concerned.

3. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every alternate Friday, between 10 AM and 12 PM, for a period of three months or till the completion of the investigation, whichever event occurs first.

4. The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when she is required to do so in writing, apart from the days mentioned above, till the completion of the investigation.

5. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him or her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the investigatin