Pre-arrest bail is granted when allegations are unsubstantiated, discrepancies exist in witness statements, there is significant delay in reporting, and documentary evidence contradicts the prosecution's claim regarding financial extortion, rendering custodial interrogation unnecessary.

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 sole accused in Crime No.96/2026 of Town Police Station, Kozhikode District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 64(1) and 308(2)

of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

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

21.11.2025 at 9.00 pm, the applicant committed rape on the victim in a lodge at Palayam in Kozhikode town, thereafter threatened her that he would send the visuals of the alleged incident to her husband, obtained ₹2,00,000/- on various occasions and mobile phone from her and thereby committed the offences.

4. I have heard Sri. K.K.Dheerendrakrishnan, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri. Thomas Sabu Vadakekatu, 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 above crime. 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 alleged incident took place in a lodge at Palayam at Kozhikode on 21.11.2025. The victim and her friend namely Shameena went to Kozhikode to attend a prayer meeting. The applicant is the friend of the son of Shameena. In the statement given by Shameena, she admits that she was in love with the applicant and they are maintaining physical relationship. The FIS would show that when the victim and Shameena reached Kozhikode, they called the applicant to accommodate them. All three of them took two rooms in the lodge mentioned above. Admittedly, the applicant and Shameena were in one room and the victim was in another room. The case of the victim is that, when Shameena went out from the lodge to buy food, the applicant came to her room and raped her. However, in the statement of Shameena, there is no such case. Her case is that, when she came to the lodge after buying food, the victim looked upset. When she asked the reason, the victim did not say anything. Shameena has no case that at any point of time the victim told her about the incident. That apart, there is a delay of more than three months in lodging the FIS. Even though the alleged incident took place on

21.11.2025, the FIS was given on 15.2.2026.

7. The victim has further alleged that the sexual act was recorded by the applicant and he threatened her that he would send the recorded visuals to her husband and obtained ₹2,00,000/- from her through Google Pay. However, the investigating officer has reported that in the investigation conducted so far, no amount was seen transferred from the account of the victim to the account of the applicant. The applicant has also produced his bank statement as Annexure A7 which would show that the case set up by the victim that she transferred money to the tune of ₹2,00,000/- to him is not true. That apart, the victim and her friend Shameena are admittedly involved in a murder case. Considering the allegations made against the applicant, his custodial interrogation seems unnecessary. For these reasons, I find this to be an appropriate case to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicant.

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

(i) The applicant shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties