Pre-arrest bail is granted or denied based on the necessity of custodial interrogation and the gravity of the allegations.

ORDER

[Bail Appl. Nos. 415 & 885 of 2026]

These applications are filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS ), seeking pre-arrest bail.

2. In B.A. No.415 of 2026, the applicants are the accused Nos.1 and 2 and in B.A. No.885 of 2026 the applicant is accused No.4 in Crime No.8/2026 of Vazhakkad Police Station, Malappuram District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 132, 121(1), 351 and 296(b) r/w with Section 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 , and Section

117(e) of the Kerala Police Act, 2011 .

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that at about

12:17 am on 03.01.2026, the accused persons 1 to 15, due to their prior animosity to the defacto complainant and his colleagues, all of them are police officials, formed themselves into an unlawful assembly at Elamaram bridge in Vazhakkad village, deterred the official duties of the defacto complainant and his colleagues, assaulted and threatened them, uttered filthy language against them and hurled abuses at them. Thus, the applicants committed the above offences.

4. I have heard Sri.Renjith B. Marar, the learned counsel for the applicants and Sri.K.A. Noushad K.A., the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the above crime. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicants with the alleged crime; hence, they are entitled to get bail. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicants, and if they are released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.

6. I went through the FIS. Specific overt acts have been alleged against the applicants in B.A. No. 415 of 2026, who are accused Nos. 1 and 2. Considering the allegations levelled against them, their custodial interrogation appears to be necessary. Hence, they cannot be granted pre-arrest bail. However, there is no specific overt act alleged against accused No. 4, who is the sole applicant in B.A. No. 885 of 2026 (wrongly described as accused No. 6 in the bail application). Hence, his custodial interrogation is not necessary, and he can be granted pre-arrest bail.

In the result, B.A. No. 885 of 2026 is allowed on the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest 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 arresting officer/investigating officer, as the case may be.

(ii) The applicant shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting himself to the deemed police custody for discovery, if any, as and when demanded.

(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 bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of violating the bail conditions shall be filed at the jur