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) 20459

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
AKSHAY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 1642 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.34/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.B.DEEPAK, SRI.KARTHIK BHAVADASAN
For the Respondents: SRI. M.C.ASHI, SR.PP

A court may grant bail if continued detention is deemed unnecessary and the evidence against the accused is insufficient.

Headnote:This judgment addresses a bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, regarding the applicant accused No.2 in Crime No.34/2026. The prosecution alleges extortion and abduction; however, the applicant's defense claims innocence and lack of evidence linking him to the crime. The court finds no reason for continued detention, allowing bail with specific conditions. The primary issues include the applicant's entitlement to bail and the sufficiency of evidence against him.

Table of Content
1. allegations of extortion and abduction. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments for and against bail. (Para 4 , 5)
3. court's reasoning for bail decision. (Para 6)

ORDER

This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (for short, BNSS ), seeking regular bail.

2. The applicant is the accused No.2 in Crime No.34/2026 of Maradu Police Station, Ernakulam District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 129 , 333, 308(2) and 140(2) r/w Section 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023 (for short, BNS ), and Sections 7 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 .

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

22.01.2026 at about 8.15 p.m., accused Nos.1 and 2, armed with a sword and knife and accompanied by a dog, in furtherance of the common intention of all the accused to extort money from one Nandan by threatening him, trespassed into the spa conducted by Nandan. They then threatened the first informant and the other women employees of the spa and attempted to take money from the counter. Thereafter, by threatening Nandan with the weapons, they abducted him in a car and obtained a ransom of Rs.28,000/-. Out of the said amount, Rs.18,000/- was transferred through Google Pay to the account of accused No. 3, and Rs.10,000/- was paid in cash to accused No. 1. Thus, the applicant has committed the above offences.

4. I have heard Sri.B.Deepak, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.M.C. Ashi, the learned 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. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicant, and he is not entitled to bail at this stage.

6. The applicant was remanded to judicial custody on 27.01.2026. The investigation is almost over, and the final report has been filed. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. For these reasons, I do not find any reason to hold that the continued detention of the applicant is required for any purpose.

Hence, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

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

(i) The applicant shall be released on bail 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 jurisdictional Magistrate/Court.

(ii) The applicant shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.

(iii) The applicant shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

(iv) The applicant shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.

(v) The application, if any, for deletion/modification of the bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of violating the bail conditions shall be filed at the jurisdictional court.

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