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) 13802

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S.DIAS, J
RIMSHADMON K. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 1531 OF 2026|CRIME NO.3/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners:SHRI.HAMZATH ALI V.K., SMT.AYISHA AFRIN A.V.K., SHRI.MUHAMMAD SHAMEEL K., SHRI.ABDULLA FUHAD K., SMT.AYISHA THASLEEMA N.P.| For the Respondents: SMT.SEETHA S.

The Court has the discretion to modify bail conditions based on the status of ongoing investigations and the rights of the accused.

Headnote:The Court analyzed the stipulations under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Information Technology Act regarding bail conditions for petitioners accused of cyber crimes. The petitioners contested the hardships caused by stringent reporting conditions imposed on them, seeking modification due to incomplete investigations. The Court agreed and modified the conditions, allowing petitioners to report only as directed until the investigation's completion.

Result: The Crl.M.C is allowed as per the modified order.

Table of Content
1. conditions of bail and hardships faced by accused are presented. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments presented by both sides regarding bail conditions. (Para 3)
3. court's observations and decisions regarding bail modification. (Para 4)

ORDER

The petitioners are accused Nos.9 to 11 in Crime No.3 of 2025 registered with the Cyber Crime Police Station, Malappuram,, alleging the commission of offences punishable under Sections 316 (2) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (‘ BNS ’ in short) and Section

66(D) of the Information Technology Act .

2. The petitioners have stated in the criminal miscellaneous case that, by Annexure A2 order, they were enlarged on bail by this Court subject to conditions. As per condition No.iii, the petitioners were directed to appear before the Investigating Officer between 10.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. on every Saturday until further orders.

Subsequently, on the application made by the petitioners, by Annexure A3 order, the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Manjeri, modified the condition No.iii, by directing the petitioners to appear before the Investigating Officer between 10.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. on the second Saturday and fourth Saturday of every month until the filing of the final report. Although, Annexure A3 order was passed on 22.12.2025, the investigation in the case is not complete and the final report has not been filed. The above condition is causing severe hardship and inconvenience to the petitioners. Therefore, the above condition may be modified.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the leaned Public Prosecutor.

4. Admittedly, Annexure A2 order was passed by this Court on 04.08.2025. Subsequently, the condition No.iii was modified by the trial court as per Annexure A3 order on 22.12.2025. It is more than two months since the above Annexure A3 order has been passed. The learned Public Prosecutor does not dispute the fact that the investigation of the case is not complete and the final report has not been filed.

In the aforesaid circumstances, I am convinced that the condition in Annexure A3 order is to be modified. Accordingly, the Crl.M.C is allowed by modifying condition in Annexure A3 order, by directing the petitioners to appear before the Investigating Officer, as and when directed, till the filing of the final report.

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