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) 14149

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
AKASH RAJ – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 793 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.3/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.M.A.SULFIA
For the Respondents: SRI.M.C. ASHI, SR. PP

Pre-arrest bail is not a matter of right and can be denied based on the seriousness of the allegations and ongoing investigations.

Headnote:The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail under Section 482 of the BNSS, alleging false implication in serious offenses. The court finds the complaints substantiated, illustrating deliberate harm and serious injury, thus refusing bail. The court emphasizes that the gravity of offenses and the case's status disallow invocation of extraordinary jurisdiction.

Table of Content
1. the case involves serious allegations with premeditated intent leading to harm. (Para 1 , 2)
2. the court considers both arguments concerning the innocence of the accused and the implications of granting bail. (Para 4 , 5)
3. the court's decision reflects the seriousness of the accused's actions and the denial of bail. (Para 7)

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 applicant is the accused No.2 in Crime No.3/2026 of Arthungal Police Station, Alappuzha District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1) and 118(2)

read with Section 3 (5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 .

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 31.12.2025 at

11:45 p.m., at Arthunkal Beach, in connection with the New Year celebrations, an altercation arose when the defacto complainant and his friend, while dancing in the crowd, accidentally touched accused No.1. This led to a scuffle. Due to this grudge, the applicant, along with the co-accused, with the intention of voluntarily causing hurt to the defacto complainant, slapped him on his left cheek. When the defacto complainant fell down, accused No.1 again attacked him and stabbed him on the left eye and eyebrow using his motorcycle key, causing loss of vision in the left eye, and at that time, the applicant also stabbed and repeatedly struck the defacto complainant on the head, back, and neck with a key and thereby committed the aforementioned offences.

4. I have heard Smt.Sulfia M.A., the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.M.C.Ashi, 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. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as part of the applicant's intentional criminal acts, and if he is released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation. 6. The law regarding the grant or refusal of pre-arrest bail is well settled. Pre-arrest bail cannot be granted as a matter of course. The power under Section 482 of BNSS could be exercised only when a special case is made out, that too, recording reasons thereof. Perusal of the case diary reveals that the accusation made against the applicant is very serious in nature, and it prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on his part. Specific overt act has been alleged against the applicant. The victim has sustained a serious injury to his eye and he underwent surgery also. Considering the gravity of the offence and stage of the investigation, I am of the view that this is not a fit case where the extraordinary jurisdiction vested with this Court under of could be invoked.

7. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is ready to surrender before the investigating officer. If the applicant surrenders before the investigating officer within one week from today, the investigating officer shall interrogate him and after interrogation, if he forms an opinion that the applicant is to be arrested, he shall record his arrest and produce him before the jurisdictional Magistrate on the same day itself. The bail application, if any, filed by the applicant shall be disposed of by the learned Magistrate, in accordance with law, on the same day itself as far as possible. The copy of the bail application shall be given to the Prosecutor in advance.

The bail application is dismissed with the above observation.

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