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) 11740

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
SHAIJU – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 944 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.125/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sri.N.L.Bitto
For the Respondents: Sri.M.C.Ashi, Sr. PP

The court granted bail recognizing the applicant is not a threat and the investigation is concluded, granted with specific conditions.

Headnote:This bail application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking regular bail. The applicant is sole accused in Crime No.125/2026, with allegations of grievous bodily harm. The Court concluded that the applicant is entitled to bail with conditions outlined in the verdict.

Table of Content
1. allegations against the accused include assault and intent to harm. (Para 2)
2. arguments presented by both sides regarding grounds for bail. (Para 4 , 5)
3. court's decision on granting bail with conditions. (Para 6)

ORDER

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.125/2026 of Mala Police Station, Thrissur District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 126 (2), 115(2), 118(1), 333, 351(3), 296(b) and 110 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 .

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on

03.02.2026 at 2.15 hours, the applicant due to enmity towards the de facto complainant and with an intention to cause bodily injury to him, trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant by possessing a chopper and uttered obscene words against the de facto complainant and his wife. Thereafter, the applicant wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant, fisted him and beat him with the handle of the chopper and stabbed on his head with a chopper. When the de facto complainant evaded from the attack, he sustained injuries on his right ear. Prosecution further alleges that if the de facto complainant failed to evade the attack, it would have resulted in his death. Thus, the applicant committed the above offences.

4. I have heard Sri.N.L. Bitto, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.M.C.Ashi, 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 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 03.02.2026. The investigation is almost over. The recovery has been effected. For these reasons, I do not find any reason to hold that the continued detention of the applicant is required for any purpose. Hence, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

In the result, the application is allowed on the following conditions: -

(i) The applicant shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Magistrate/Court.

(ii) The applicant shall fully co-operate with the investigation.

(iii) The applicant shall appear before the investigating ofÏcer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until further orders. He shall also appear before the investigating ofÏcer as and when required.

(iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.

(v) The applicant shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

(vi) The applicant shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.

(vii) The application, if any, for deletion/modification of the bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of violating the bail conditions shall be filed at the jurisdictional court.

Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE mea APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. NO. 944 OF 2026 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure-1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.125 OF 2026 OF MALA POLICE STATION DATED

3/2/2026 Annexure-2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.MP.1 OF

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