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) 12478

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
AKASH VARGHESE – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 985 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.99/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.SARATH BABU KOTTAKKAL, SHRI.SEBASTIN, SMT.KARTHIKA S.
For the Respondents: SRI K A NOUSHAD (SR PP)

Accused entitled to bail due to insufficient evidence and consideration of custody duration.

Headnote:This judgment pertains to bail application No. 985 of 2026 under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The applicant is alleged to have committed serious offences against the defacto complainant stemming from prior enmity on 18/01/2026. The court concludes that the applicant is entitled to bail due to the lack of strong evidence and period of custody, allowing release under certain conditions.

Table of Content
1. bail application based on alleged prior enmity and criminal acts. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments by parties regarding the applicant's innocence and need for bail. (Para 4 , 5)
3. court's reasoning regarding sufficient ground for bail consideration. (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 accused No.2 in Crime No.99/2026 of Ollur Police Station, Thrissur District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 126 (2), 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 117(2) and 351(3) read with Section 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

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

18/01/2026 at 8.00 p.m. the applicant and the accused No.1, in furtherance of their common intention, due to previous enmity towards the defacto complainant, wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant and his friend who came there in a motorcycle, adjacent to Martin Soda Company at Peruvamkulangara, slapped on his face and beat on his body with an iron rod causing fracture on his shoulder bone. Thus, the applicant committed the aforesaid offences.

4. I have heard Sri. Sarath Babu Kottakkal, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri. K.A. Noushad, 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 20.01.2026. The investigation is almost over. The recovery has already been effected. The accused No.1 has already been released on bail. It is true that the applicant has two criminal antecedents. However, considering the period of detention he had undergone and the stage of investigation, I am of view that the further detention of the applicant is not necessary. 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 officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until further orders. He shall also appear before the investigating officer 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

Jms

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