Anticipatory bail under S. 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is not a matter of right and requires a compelling case, especially when investigation is in a preliminary stage and custodial interrogation is deemed necessary for serious criminal offences.

ORDER

This is the second application 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.6 in Crime No.874/2025 of Cherpulassery Police Station, Palakkad District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 140(2), 310(2) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

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

25.11.2025 at 9.00 hours, due to the previous animosity towards the defacto complainant, accused Nos.1 to 6 kidnapped him and demanded Rs.20,00,000/-. Accused Nos.1 to 6 wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant, beat him with the hand and stick and threatened to kill him. The accused wrongfully took Rs.1,15,000/-, gold and title deeds from the de facto complainant and thereby committed the aforesaid offences.

4. I have heard Smt. Megha Biju, 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, he 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 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. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that, now the matter has been settled between the de facto complainant and the applicant and the de facto complainant has sworn in an affidavit to that effect. However, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor submitted that even though the investigating officer contacted the de facto complainant to ascertain about the veracity of the affidavit, he did not turn up. The investigation is in a preliminary stage. The custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary for the investigation. The applicant has not made out a case to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the BNSS for the second time. The bail application is, accordingly, dismissed.