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) 29104

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Kauser Edappagath, J
ATHIRA S – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 1852 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: B.Mohanlal, P.S.Preetha, Motty Jiby Vasudevan, Abijith M., Avani Nair, Jayaprabha Arjun, Praveena T.
For the Respondents: M.R.Sasith, M.C.Ashi

Pre-arrest bail under Section 482 BNSS requires a special case recorded by Court and cannot be granted routinely even if allegations are serious.

Headnote:This Court under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 entertained a bail application alleging misappropriation of funds through discarded bills in a commercial transaction. The case diary revealed a premeditated act with specific allegations in the FIR, establishing prima facie criminal liability. The primary fact findings confirmed ongoing investigation at the preliminary stage with financial transactions of Rs. 25 lakhs alleged to have been misappropriated over three years. The issue framed by the Court centered on whether pre-arrest bail could be granted despite serious allegations under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The ratio decided is that pre-arrest bail cannot be granted as a matter of course and requires a special case to be made out; the power under Section 482 of BNSS must be exercised only when the Court records reasons leading to the conclusion that the accused is entitled to bail protection. The final outcome of this Court is the dismissal of the bail application, refusing pre-arrest bail to the accused.

Table of Content
1. applicants pre-arrest bail petition circumstances and detailed prosecution allegations of misappropriation (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments presented by counsel for applicant, additional respondent and prosecution regarding grant or refusal of bail (Para 4 , 5)
3. legal principles regarding pre-arrest bail and court conclusion that investigation stage prevents grant of bail (Para 6 , 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.1 in Crime No.195/2026 of Chavara Police Station, Kollam District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is as follows: The accused No.2 was working as a security staff in the shop of the complainant. The applicant was the accountant. She used to discard bills typed in the computer without taking a print out and delivering to the customers. The amounts covered by the discarded bills in respect of the articles actually sold, for which money was collected were misappropriated by her and the accused No.2. The applicant used to hand over the money to the accused No.2 as if she was seeking exchange of that money for smaller denominations. She had been working in the shop for the last three years and during that period, ₹25 lakhs have been misappropriated by her and the accused No.2 and thereby committed the offences.

4. I have heard Sri. B. Mohanlal the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri. M.R. Sasith, the learned counsel for the additional respondent No.3 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, she is entitled to bail. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as part of the applicant's intentional criminal acts, and if she 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 her part. There are specific allegations against the applicant in the FI Statement.

7. The investigation is in a preliminary stage. The custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary for the investigation. As rightly argued by the learned Public Prosecutor, the possibility of the applicant influencing the witnesses and interfering with the investigation cannot be ruled out if she is released on bail. 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 Section 482 of BNSS could be invoked. The bail application is, accordingly, dismissed.

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