Protection is paramount in domestic violence cases, weighing the safety of the complainant against the accused's right to bail.

ORDER

This petition seeking regular bail has been filed by the sole accused in Crime No.924 of 2025 of Thrikkakara Police Station, Ernakulam District registered alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 126 (2), 351(2) and 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 .

2. The prosecution allegation in this case is that the accused expelled the defacto complainant, his wife, from the house in which they were residing together. Thereafter, on the strength of a protection order from the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kakkanad, the defacto complainant was residing on the first floor of the house. While so, on 20.12.2025, at 06.00 a.m., the accused who came to the first floor of the house with a knife, kicked her on the chest and when she fell down, the accused uttered obscene words and then stabbed her with a knife on her legs, below the right side of the chest on the abdomen, and on the right hand. Hence, the accused is alleged to have committed the aforementioned offences.

3. I heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Senior Public Prosecutor, and also perused the available records.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the allegations levelled against him. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner is having a strained relationship with his wife and in order to wreck vengeance, the present case is foisted suppressing the actual matters transpired. The learned counsel further submitted that, on the alleged date of the incident, the defacto complainant took an initiative for a discussion, to settle the family disputes which were pending between herself and the petitioner and when the petitioner approached the defacto complainant for a discussion, the defacto complainant attacked the petitioner abruptly with knife and in the attempt to rescue himself, there occurred a scuffle between him and the defacto complainant. If at all any injury had been sustained, it was unfortunately occurred during that scuffle. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner was arrested in this case on 21.12.2025 and the investigation in this case has progressed substantially. It is pointed out that the recovery of the weapon allegedly used in the perpetration of the offence also has been recovered. According to the learned counsel, as the investigation is practically over, further judicial incarceration of the petitioner will serve no purpose. On these premises, it is urged that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.

5. Per contra, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application by highlighting the serious nature of the offence attributed against the petitioner. According to the learned Senior Public Prosecutor, the defacto complainant is a helpless lady who is now residing in the first floor of a house under the cover of a protection order obtained under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short, D.V. Act) from the jurisdictional Magistrate. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor urged that while considering this bail application, the nature of the weapon used, the part of the body where injury is inflicted etc. cannot be overlooked and if the petitioner is released on bail, there is every possibility of repeating similar criminal activities by him. In that event, the life and security of the defacto complainant would be in peril. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor also highlighted the fact that the petitioner is residing in the same house where the defacto complainant is now residing and the chance of repetition of offence is highly probable.

6. From the available records and the submission