Kerala High Court
Muhammed Nijas vs State Of Kerala on 1 August, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
B.A.No.8691 of 2025 1
2025:KER:58345
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 10TH SRAVANA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 8691 OF 2025
CRIME NO.487/2025 OF Malayinkeezh Police Station,
Thiruvananthapuram
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 25.06.2025 IN CRMC NO.1729
OF 2025 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT
(ATROCITIES & SEXUAL VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN &
CHILDREN),THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2:
MUHAMMED NIJAS, AGED 24 YEARS
S/O M. SHOJA, KANIYAKKONAM, MANAPPURAM, MACHAL P.0,
MALAYINKEEZHU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695571
BY ADVS.
SRI.G.RANJU MOHAN
SMT.M.SANTHI (K/868/2011)
SMT.SAREENA.S
SMT.THEERTHA NAIR A.P.
SHRI.PYARIN B. KURUVITHADAM
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
SRI. PRASANTH M.P., PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.8691 of 2025 2
2025:KER:58345
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
......................................................
B.A.No.8691 of 2025
...................................................
Dated this the 1st day of August, 2025
ORDER
This bail application is filed under section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS').
2. Petitioner is the second accused in Crime No.487 of 2025 of Malayinkeezh Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 329(3), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 110 and 351(2) r/w Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to the prosecution, on 30.04.2025 at about 2.15 p.m., the accused assaulted the de facto complainant using a granite stone, causing injury on his forehead and thereby committed the offences alleged.
4. Heard Adv.G.Ranju Mohan, the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri.P.P.Prasanth M.P., the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that B.A.No.8691 of 2025 3 2025:KER:58345 petitioner has no involvement in the alleged crime and that the overt act resulting in injury to the de facto complainant was caused by the 1st accused and, therefore, he may be granted anticipatory bail.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted that custodial interrogation is necessary.
7. Petitioner, along with the 1st accused, are alleged to have assaulted the de facto complainant with a granite stone. Though the petitioner alleges that the said overt act resulting in injury to the de facto complainant was caused by the 1 st accused, I am of the view that those are matters to be identified during investigation. However, considering the nature of overt acts alleged against the petitioner, I am of the view that custodial interrogation is not necessary.
8. In Sushila Aggarwal and Others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Another, 2020 (5) SCC 1, it was held that while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail or not, Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the B.A.No.8691 of 2025 4 2025:KER:58345 facts of the case. Grant of anticipatory bail is a matter of discretion and the kind of conditions to be imposed or not to be imposed are all dependent on facts of each case, and subject to the discretion of the court.
9. On a consideration of the circumstances arising in the case, this Court is of the view that though the allegations are serious in nature, petitioner is entitled to be released on pre-arrest bail on conditions.
Accordingly, this application is allowed on the following conditions:
(a) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on 11.08.2025 and shall subject himself to interrogation.
(b) If after interrogation, the Investigating Officer proposes to arrest the petitioner, then, he shall be released on bail on him executing a bond for Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum before the Investigating Officer.
(c) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required and shall also co-operate with the investigation.
B.A.No.8691 of 2025 5
2025:KER:58345
(d) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence.
(e) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions or if any modification or deletion of the conditions are required, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider such applications, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE sp/02/08/2025 B.A.No.8691 of 2025 6 2025:KER:58345 APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 8691/2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.
487/2025 OF MALAYINKIL POLICE STATION Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY SESSIONS COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 23-06- 2025 IN CRIMINAL M.C.NO.1729/2025