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) 13508

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
SHIJI VALIYAKATH BEERAN – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 13940 OF 2025 | CRIME NO.33/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.P.S.ABDUL KAREEM, SHRI.AFTHABUDHEEN P.K, SHRI.NAZIF K.N.
For the Respondents: SMT.SREEJA V., SR. PP

The court clarified its authority to issue transit bail in cases involving inter-state arrest concerns, ensuring protection of personal liberty pending jurisdictional remedies.

Headnote:This judgment addresses an application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 for bail. The applicant, accused No. 8 in Crime No.33/2025, apprehends interstate arrest. The court determined the applicant's fears regarding his personal liberty were reasonable and allowed a transit bail for him to seek remedy from the appropriate jurisdictional court within three weeks. The order states that the applicant won't be arrested in the meantime.

Table of Content
1. application filed under bnss for bail. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)

O R D E R

This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS ), 2023. 2. The applicant is the accused No.8 in Crime No.33/2025 of CCB Bengaluru City Police Station, Karnataka. The offences alleged against the applicant are punishable under Sections 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code , 1860.

3. The applicant apprehends arrest by respondent No.1 in the above crime.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. 5. The Supreme Court in Priya Indoria v.

State of Karnataka (2023 KHC OnLine 6997) held that though this Court is not in a position to grant pre-arrest bail in cases where crimes have been registered outside the territorial jurisdiction, this Court is empowered to pass an order of transit bail.

6. The apprehension of the applicant of an inter-state arrest appears to be well-founded. The grounds raised by the applicant for an order of transit bail appears to be reasonable to avoid minimum threat to his life and personal liberty in the jurisdiction where the FIR is registered.

7. The applicant has satisfied this Court regarding his inability to seek anticipatory bail from the court which has territorial jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence immediately.

This bail application is therefore disposed of with liberty to the applicant to approach the jurisdictional Court and seek proper remedies in accordance with law, within a period of three weeks from today. The respondent No.1 shall not arrest the applicant till the expiry of the said three weeks.

Sd/-

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