Bail granted based on insufficient evidence for continued detention per Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

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 applicants are the accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.1485/2025 of Vadakkancherry Police Station, Palakkad District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 132 , 110, 324(4), 265, 351(3), 249(c) and 263(a)

read with Section 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the prayer for bail by the accused No.2/applicant No.1 is not pressed.

4. The prosecution case, in short, is that the accused in this case, named Rahul @ Appu, is also involved in Crime No.1128/2025 of Mannuthi Police Station. On 29.12.2025 at 15.45 hours, the defacto complainant and the police party, while searching Rahul, found him in a bus parked near the vegetable shop near Diana Bar, Vadakkanchery. When they attempted to take him into custody, the accused criminally intimidated the police party by waving a knife towards them. If the defacto complainant and the police party had not evaded the assault of the accused, they might have sustained grievous injuries resulting in their death. The accused also caused damage by destroying the glass of the car in which the police party came, causing a loss of about ₹10,000/-. The applicant No.1 helped the accused No.1 to escape from the spot with the handcuffs in his motorcycle bearing registration No.KL-49-K2678. The accused obstructed the defacto complainant and the police party from discharging their official duties. On investigation, the involvement of accused Nos. 3 to 6 is revealed in this case. It is alleged that the accused shared their common intention in committing the above said offences. Thus, the accused have committed the above-mentioned offences.

5. I have heard Sri.Sarath M.S., the learned counsel for the applicants and Sri.M.C.Ashi, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

6. The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicant No.2 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 No.2 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 No.2, and he is not entitled to bail at this stage.

7. The applicant No.2 was remanded to judicial custody on 30.12.2025. I went through the FI Statement. No specific overt act is alleged against the accused No.3/applicant No.2. The only allegation against him is that he harboured the accused No.2 after the crime. The investigation is almost over. For these reasons, I do not find any reason to hold that the continued detention of the applicant No.2 is required for any purpose. Hence, the applicant No.2 is entitled to be released on bail.

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

(i) The applicant No.2 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 No.2 shall fully co-operate with the investigation.

(iii) The applicant No.2 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 No.2 shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.

(v) The applicant No.2 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 eviden