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) 10495

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
ASHIQ AGED 42 YEARS KURUKKAN, KUNNUMMAL HOUSE, ERAVATTUR, PERAMBRA, THRISSUR, PIN - 680689 – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 769 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.790/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.T.K.SANDEEP
For the Respondents: SMT.SREEJA V., SR. PP

The court emphasizes the gravity of the allegations and denies bail based on the serious nature of the accusations and evidence presented.

Headnote:The applicant seeks bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, with allegations of serious offences of rape under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The court concludes that the applicant is not entitled to bail due to the seriousness of the accusations and nature of the crime, displaying signs of premeditated criminal behavior. The bail application is dismissed.

Table of Content
1. application for bail based on serious allegations of rape under recent statutes. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments regarding the innocence and implications surrounding the accused's actions. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)

O R D E R

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

2. The applicant is the sole accused in Crime No.790/2025 of Vadanappally Police Station, Thrissur District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 64(2)(m) and 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 .

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 3rd, 4th and 7th of September 2025, the applicant committed rape on the defacto complainant in the house of the applicant at Qatar and thereby committed the aforementioned offences.

4. I have heard Sri.T.K.Sandeep, the learned counsel for the applicant and Smt.Sreeja V., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

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

6. The applicant was remanded to judicial custody on 31.01.2026. A perusal of the case diary would reveal that the accusation against the applicant is very serious, and it prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on his part. This is a case where the defacto complainant, who was the maid of the applicant, was repeatedly subjected to sexual assault. Considering the nature of the crime, the gravity of the offence, the complicity of the applicant in it, and the facts and circumstances mentioned above, I am of the view that the applicant cannot be released on bail at this stage.

The bail application, accordingly, is dismissed.

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