Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 20669
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
CHIRAJUL HAQUE – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 1630 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.117/2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.DHANYA S NAIR
For the Respondents: SMT.SREEJA. V
Bail granted on grounds of insufficient evidence to connect the accused to the crime.
Headnote:This application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS seeks regular bail for the accused in Crime No.117/2026. The applicant is alleged to have supplied contraband to another accused, but claims innocence. The Court determines sufficient grounds for bail, taking into account the lack of prior criminal history. The applicant is granted bail with specific conditions to ensure cooperation and prevent tampering with evidence.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. bail application details and allegations. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. specific allegations against the accused. (Para 3) |
| 3. arguments presented by both sides. (Para 4 , 5) |
O R D E R
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.117/2026 of Aluva West Police Station, Ernakulam District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 20 (b)(ii)(A) and 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’).
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 12.02.2026 at about 01.30 p.m., accused No.1 was found in possession of 42.65 grams of ganja and 7.26 grams of MDMA in the residential house of the accused No.1 at Veliyathunadu Kara, Karumallur Village. The specific allegation against the applicant is that the accused No.1 had procured the contraband from the applicant.
4. I have heard Smt.Dhanya S.Nair the learned counsel for the applicant and Smt.Sreeja V., 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, the applicant is entitled to bail. On the other hand, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicant, and the applicant is not entitled to bail at this stage.
6. The applicant was remanded to judicial custody on
12.02.2026. The investigation is almost over and the recovery has been effected. 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 sureties shall be from the State of Kerala.
(iii) The applicant shall fully co-operate with the investigation.
(iv) The applicant shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until further orders. The applicant shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.
(v) The applicant shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.
(vi) 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.
(vii) The applicant shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.
(viii) 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.
