Bail can be granted when no serious overt act is established against accused involved in criminal allegations.

O R D E R

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

3 to 6 in Crime No.1479/2025 of Vadakkencherry Police Station, Palakkad District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 324(4) and 324(5) read with 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 .

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the defacto complainant and his family members warned the accused No.1, who was in love with the defacto complainant’s aunt’s granddaughter. Infuriated by this, on 27.12.2025 at 9:45 p.m. at Nattukal, Manjapra, accused Nos.1 to 7, along with 25 other identifiable persons, in prosecution of their common object to commit rioting, formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with the knowledge that they were the members of such assembly. While the defacto complainant and his relatives were returning home after Manjapra Arattu festival, the accused No.2 caught hold of the defacto complainant’s shirt collar and wrongly restrained him, while accused No.1 voluntarily caused hurt to him by hitting him with a stone tied with cloth. When the defacto complainant fell down, accused No.1 kicked him. When CW2 attempted to prevent the same, accused No.1 hit the right ear of CW2 with the cloth- tied stone, resulting in fracture of his right eardrum. Accused Nos.3 to 6 fisted and kicked the defacto complainant. When the brother and wife of the defacto complainant intervened, accused Nos.3 and 4 hit him on his back, while accused Nos.6 and 7 fisted other family members. Further, when accused No.1 pulled back the defacto complainant’s shirt’s collar, both of them fell into the paddy field. The defacto complainant’s gold chain, weighing about 1.5 sovereigns, was lost in the incident.

4. I have heard Sri. Nireesh Mathew, the learned counsel for the applicants and Sri. M.C.Ashi, 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 Senior 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 act has been alleged against the applicant No.1, who is the accused No.1. He has used the stone to assault the de facto complainant, who sustained fracture. Hence, he cannot be extended the benefit of pre-arrest bail. However, no serious overt act has been alleged against the remaining applicants, who are the accused Nos.3 to 6. It appears that their custodial interrogation is not necessary. For these reasons, I find this to be an appropriate case to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicant Nos.2 to 5/accused Nos.3 to 6.

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

(i) The applicant Nos.2 to 5/accused Nos.3 to

6 shall be released on bail in the event of their arrest on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) each 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 Nos.2 to 5/accused Nos.3 to

6 shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting themselves to the deemed police custody for discovery, if any, as and when demanded.

(iii) The applicant Nos.2 to 5/