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) 12815

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
NIKHILDAS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 1028 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.88/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.NIREESH MATHEW
For the Respondents: SMT.SREEJA V.

The court grants bail emphasizing the lack of necessity for continued detention and the absence of strong evidence against the applicant.

Headnote:The application for bail is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), based on allegations of wrongful restraint and assault. The Court finds the applicant entitled to bail as continued detention is unnecessary. The respondent alleges intentional criminal acts by the applicant, while the applicant contests his innocence and the adequacy of evidence. Ultimately, bail is granted under specified conditions.

Table of Content
1. facts of the case concern alleged assault and threats. (Para 2)
2. arguments focus on innocence and lack of evidence. (Para 4 , 5)
3. bail granted with conditions due to lack of necessity for continued detention. (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.88/2026 of Mankara Police Station, Palakkad District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 126 (2), 296(b) and

110 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023.

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

31.01.2026 at about 06:45 pm, the applicant due to the enmity with the defacto complainant regarding the scuffle which happened on the day prior to the new year, wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant and his friend, who were travelling in a scooter by parking the motorcycle across the road. The applicant threatened to put the defacto complainant behind the bars. Thereafter the applicant pulled out a beer bottle from the back of his shirt and beat on the forehead of the defacto complainant, whereby he sustained injuries. Thus, the applicant committed the above offences.

4. I have heard Sri.Nireesh Mathew, 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 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 01.02.2026. 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 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 mea APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. NO. 1028 OF 2026 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure 1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.88/2026 OF MANKARA POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT DATED 01.02.2026 Annexure 2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED

11.02.2026 IN CMP.NO.44/2026 PASSED BY THE JUDL. FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-

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