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) 9531

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
SHYAMJITH E – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 12571 OF 2025 | CRIME NO.348/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.NIREESH MATHEW
For the Respondents: SRI.M.C. ASHI, SR. PP

Transit bail can be granted to apprehended individuals awaiting jurisdictional remedies despite crimes being outside territorial jurisdiction.

Headnote:This judgment pertains to an application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The accused, apprehending arrest in Crime No.348/2025, sought transit bail. The court referred to the ruling in Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka regarding transit bail jurisdiction. The court concluded that the applicant's reasons for transit bail were reasonable, allowing him to seek remedies in the jurisdictional court within three weeks.

Table of Content
1. application under section 482. (Para 1 , 2)
2. apprehension of arrest. (Para 3 , 4)
3. jurisdiction for transit bail. (Para 5 , 6)
4. conclusion and directives. (Para 7)

O R D E R

This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS ), 2023.

2. The applicant is the accused in Crime No.348/2025 of Chettipalayam Police Station, Coimbatore District, Tamilnadu. The offences alleged against the applicant are punishable under Sections 109 and 296(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023.

3. The applicant apprehends arrest by respondent No.2 in the above crime.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

5. The Supreme Court in Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka (2023 KHC OnLine 6997) held that though this Court is not in a position to grant pre-arrest bail in cases where crimes have been registered outside the territorial jurisdiction, this Court is empowered to pass an order of transit bail.

6. The apprehension of the applicant of an inter-state arrest appears to be well-founded. The grounds raised by the applicant for an order of transit bail appears to be reasonable to avoid minimum threat to his life and personal liberty in the jurisdiction where the FIR is registered.

7. The applicant has satisfied this Court regarding his inability to seek anticipatory bail from the court which has territorial jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence immediately.

This bail application is therefore disposed of with liberty to the applicant to approach the jurisdictional Court and seek proper remedies in accordance with law, within a period of three weeks from today. The respondent No.2 shall not arrest the applicant till the expiry of the said three weeks.

Sd/-

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