Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 61361
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S. Dias, J
A. Kumar @ Thirukumaran Chettiyar @ Kumaran – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 4382 OF 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Abdul Raoof Pallipath, Prajit Ratnakaran, Anju Dony
For the Respondents: Devadas H Mallan
The court reaffirmed the principle that 'bail is the rule and jail is an exception,' ruling that further detention is unnecessary when investigation is substantially complete and other co-accused have been granted bail, regardless of the seriousness of allegations.
Headnote:(A) Bail - Principle of "Bail is the rule, jail is an exception" - Detention should not be used as punishment, and bail should be granted if the case for it is made out, ensuring the right to liberty under Article 21. (Para 8, 9)
(B) Bail - Consideration of Detention Period and Co-accused - Grant of bail is appropriate when the petitioner has been in custody for a significant period, investigation is complete regarding the petitioner, and other accused have already been released. (Para 10)
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail considering the period of detention and the principle that bail is the rule and jail is an exception.
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.09.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
C.S.DIAS, J.---------------------------------------
BAIL APPL. NO.4382 OF 2026 ------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 17th day of September, 2026
ORDER
The application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’, in short), by the 5th accused in Crime No. 273/2026 registered by the Walayar Police Station, Palakkad, as against the accused persons for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 111, 61(2) and 351(2) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, (‘BNS’, in short). The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 03.07.2026.
2. The crux of the prosecution case is that the 1st accused along with other accused persons induced the defacto complainant to part with money, by making him believe that they would arrange a loan for Rs.100 crore for him to start a steel plant. Accordingly, the 1st accused, who is the Managing Director of an institution and the 6th accused describing himself as financial agent of a financial institution, received Rs.3,65,00,000/-, five mobile phones and two gold coins, as advance amount for arranging the loan with a dishonest intention to make unlawful gain and cause unlawful loss to the defacto complainant. Although the accused received the money from the defacto complainant, they failed to arrange the loan, but they misappropriated the money. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.
3. The Investigating Officer has filed a statement, inter alia, stating that the petitioner is kingpin in the above crime. He has criminal antecedents. He is an accused in Crime No.07/2026 registered by the Darmapuri District Crime Branch and Crime Nos.11/2022 and 12/2021 registered by the Karur District Crime Branch. The investigation in the case is only at its nascent stage. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is a likelihood of him tampering with the evidence and hampering the investigation. Therefore, the application may be dismissed. However, the Investigating Officer has candidly admitted that the accused Nos.5, 7 to 12, who are arrested on 19.12.2026, have been enlarged on bail by this Court, subject to the condition they should not leave the State of Kerala. However, as the said accused persons had violated the bail conditions, their bail was cancelled. Hence, this petition may be dismissed.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent of the accusations levelled against him. There is no material to substantiate the petitioner’s culpability in the crime. The accused Nos. 5, 7 to 12 have been enlarged on bail by this Court. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 03.07.2026, which is 78 days now. The petitioner would be entitled to statutory bail, if the offence under Section 111 is attracted, within another 12 days. The investigation in the case, so far as the petitioner is concerned, is practically complete. The petitioner is willing to abide by any condition imposed by this Court. Therefore, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. He submits that the petitioner has antecedents. As two charge sheets have been filed against the petitioner by the Karur District Crime Branch, the offence under Section 111 is attracted. The Investigating Officer has 90 days to complete the investigation since the offence under Section 111 is alleged against the petitioner. Therefore, the application may be dismissed.
7. Going by the report of the Investigating Officer, it is an undisputed fact that the accused Nos. 5, 7 to 12 were enlarged on bail by this Court on 20.05.2026. The petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last 78 days.
