Custodial interrogation required for serious charges, while lesser involvement allows bail with conditions.

ORDER

This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (for short, BNSS ), seeking pre-

arrest bail.

2. The applicants are the accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.19/2026 of Chadayamangalam Police Station, Kollam District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(1), 118(1), 118(2), 351(3) and 126 r/w Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha , 2023.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the applicants had dumped waste in front of the shop of the complainant. The complainant had questioned the conduct of the applicants. In retaliation, on 21.12.2025 at 21 hours, applicant Nos. 1 and 2 had approached the complainant. The applicant No.2 had wrongfully restrained the complainant. The applicant No.1 had struck the left eye of the complainant with a punching bangle. The complainant had fallen on the ground. The applicant No.1 had struck the face, head etc. of the complainant continuously with the punching metal. The complainant sustained fracture of the nasal bone and also fracture of the bone below eye. One tooth was also broken. Thus, the applicants committed the above offences.

4. I have heard Sri.C.R.Sivakumar, the learned counsel for the applicants and Smt.Sreeja V., the learned Senior 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. The alleged incident took place on 21.12.2025.

The FIR was registered on 04.01.2026. However, the victim has offered a reason for the delay in lodging the FIR, stating that he was hospitalized. The wound certificate shows that the victim sustained multiple fractures in the incident. I went through the FIS, and there is a specific overt act alleged against the accused No. 1, who is the applicant No. 1. He allegedly used a weapon. It is true that he also sustained minor injuries in the incident, as evident from Annexures A2 and A3. It is also true that his father filed a complaint against the de facto complainant on 21.12.2025 itself. However, considering the overt act alleged against the applicant No.1/accused No.1 and the grievous nature of the injuries sustained by the de facto complainant, I am of the view that his custodial interrogation is necessary. So far as applicant No.2/accused No.2 is concerned, no serious overt acts have been alleged against him. He has not used any weapon either. Hence, I am of the view that his custodial interrogation is not necessary. For these reasons, I find this to be an appropriate case to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicant No.2.

In the result, the application is allowed in part as follows:

(i) The applicant No.2 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 No.2 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 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