Kerala High Court
Ajith A.A vs State Of Kerala on 6 August, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
2025:KER:58829
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 15TH SRAVANA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 8918 OF 2025
CRIME NO.436/2025 OF MARARIKULAM POLICE STATION,
ALAPPUZHA AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 21.06.2025 IN CRMC
NO.772 OF 2025 OF DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT/RENT CONTROL
APPELLATE AUTHORITY, ALAPPUZHA.
PETITIONER:
AJITH A.A.,
AGED 40 YEARS,
ASHALAYAM, CHERUVARANAM, VARANAM P.O,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688 555.
BY ADVS.
SMT.M.A.SULFIA
SRI.ABDUL JALEEL.A
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031.
SMT. SREEJA V., PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl. No.8918 of 2025
2025:KER:58829
-2-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
--------------------------------------
Bail Appl. No.8918 of 2025
------------------------------------
Dated this the 6th 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 accused in Crime No.436 of 2025 of Mararikkulam Police Station, Alappuzha, registered for the offences punishable under sections 296(b), 324 (2), 351(3) and 118(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS').
3. According to the prosecution, on 02.06.2025, accused assaulted the de facto complainant with a knife and threatened him, causing damage to the front side of the vehicle causing a loss of Rs.5,000/- and thereby committed the offences alleged.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner has been falsely arrayed as an accused and that he has no involvement in the alleged crime
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted that his custodial interrogation is necessary. Bail Appl. No.8918 of 2025
2025:KER:58829 -3-
7. Petitioner is alleged to have, due to an enmity that arose out of the de facto complainant honking his horn, assaulted the de facto complainant on 02.06.2025, with a knife and threatened him and also caused damage to the scooter driven by him and thereby committed the offences alleged.
8. The de facto complainant was assaulted by the accused, since he had sounded his horn to pave the way for his movement. The injuries inflicted are not grievous or serious. Considering the nature of injuries as well as the nature of allegations, I am of the view that the petitioner can be protected with an order of pre-arrest bail.
9. In Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), 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 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.
10. In Ashok Kumar v. Union Territory of Chandigarh, [2024 SCC OnLine SC 274], it has been held that a mere assertion on the part of the State while opposing the plea for anticipatory bail that custodial interrogation is required would not be sufficient and that the Bail Appl. No.8918 of 2025 2025:KER:58829 -4- State would have to show or indicate more than prima facie case as to why custodial interrogation of the accused is required for the purpose of investigation.
11. In the instant case, the State has not been able to convince this Court that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary. On a consideration of the circumstances arising in the case, this Court is of the view that though the allegations are serious in nature, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required and the petitioner is entitled to be released on pre-arrest bail.
Accordingly, this application is allowed on the following conditions:
(a) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on 18.08.2025 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.
(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.
(f) Petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the Court having jurisdiction.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions or if any Bail Appl. No.8918 of 2025 2025:KER:58829 -5- 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 ADS Bail Appl. No.8918 of 2025 2025:KER:58829 -6- APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 8918/2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME NO.436/2025 DATED 02/06/2025 OF MARARIKULAM POLICE STATION.
Annexure A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER IN CRL.M.C. NO.772/2025 DATED 21/06/2025 BY THE LEARNED SESSIONS JUDGE, ALAPPUZHA.