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) 22411

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
MURUKESAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 1666 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.83/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: K.ARAVIND MENON, P.VIJAYA BHANU (SR.), P.M.RAFIQ, AJEESH K.SASI, SRUTHY N. BHAT, SRUTHY K.K, AARON ZACHARIAS BENNY, SONA MARIA BIJU
For the Respondents: K.A. NOUSHAD, SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Pre-arrest bail is not granted as a matter of course where serious allegations are established, demanding a specific case justifying its issuance.

Headnote:This judgment addresses an application for pre-arrest bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, concerning allegations against the applicant for serious criminal offenses. The court found that the prosecution's assertions indicate a premeditated criminal act by the applicant, leading to sustained injuries to the complainant. Consequently, the court determined that the extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 could not be invoked. The applicant was instructed to surrender before the investigating officer and comply with specific conditions regarding his bail application.

Table of Content
1. facts of the case involving serious accusations against the applicant. (Para 2 , 3)
2. arguments presented by counsel regarding applicant's innocence. (Para 5)
3. court's evaluation of the suitability for pre-arrest bail. (Para 6)
4. court's directive for the applicant's surrender and conditions. (Para 7)

ORDER

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.83/2026 of Meenakshipuram Police Station, Palakkad District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 118 (1), 110 and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023 (for short, the BNS ).

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 02.02.2026 at 06:30 pm, the applicant along with the accused No.1 trespassed into the courtyard of the house of the de facto complainant, assaulted the de facto complainant and others with deadly weapons and thereby committed the offences. 4. I have heard Sri.K.Aravind Menon, the learned counsel for the applicants and Sri. K.A.Noushad, 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 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. I went through the FIS. Specific overt act has been attributed against the applicant. The de facto complainant has sustained injury in the incident. 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. Accordingly, this bail application is disposed of on the following conditions:

(i) The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer within two weeks from today and shall subject himself to interrogation.

(ii) After interrogation, if the Investigating Officer arrests the applicant, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional court without undue delay.

(iii) On production of the applicant before the jurisdictional court, if any application for bail is filed, the court shall consider the same, preferably on the same day itself, in accordance with law.

(iv) The copy of the bail application shall be given to the Prosecutor in advance.

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