Kerala High Court
Mithun vs State Of Kerala on 14 August, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
B.A.No.9325 of 2025 1
2025:KER:61503
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 23RD SRAVANA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 9325 OF 2025
CRIME NO.77/2024 OF Excise Enforcement and Anti Narcotic
Special Squad, Ernakulam, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.746 OF 2025 OF
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT- VIII/,
ERNAKULAM / IV ADDITIONAL MACT/RENT CONTROL APPELLATE
AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 2 & 4:
1 MITHUN, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O. KUDDUS SEKH,
TIKTIKIPARA, SIBNAGAR, LASKARPUR VILLAGE,
DOMKAL TALUK, JALANGI, MURSHIDABAD, WEST BENGAL,
PIN - 742306
2 HABIBUR RAHMAN, AGED 22 YEARS
S/O. CHANDU SEKH, RANINAGAR, BADANABAD,
DHANIRAMPUR VILLAGE, JALANGI TALUK, MURSHIDABAD,
WEST BENGAL, PIN - 742306
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.MOHAMED SABAH
SRI.LIBIN STANLEY
SMT.SAIPOOJA
SRI.SADIK ISMAYIL
SMT.R.GAYATHRI
B.A.No.9325 of 2025 2
2025:KER:61503
SRI.M.MAHIN HAMZA
SHRI.ALWIN JOSEPH
SHRI.BENSON AMBROSE
RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 THE EXCISE CIRCLE INSPECTOR
EXCISE ENFORCEMENT & ANTI - NARCOTIC SPECIAL SQUAD,
ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682018
SRI. NOUSHAD K.A. (PP)
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.9325 of 2025 3
2025:KER:61503
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
......................................................
B.A.No.9325 of 2025
...................................................
Dated this the 14th day of August, 2025
ORDER
This bail application is filed under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS').
2. Petitioners are accused 2 and 4 in Crime No.77 of 2024 of the Excise Enforcement and Anti Narcotic Special Squad, Ernakulam, which is now pending as S.C.No.746 of 2025 on the files of the Additional Sessions Court-VIII, Ernakulam, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [for brevity, 'NDPS Act'].
3. According to the prosecution, on 11.12.2024 at about 5.55 a.m., accused 1 to 4 were found in possession of 35.838 Kg. of ganja near the North Railway Station, Ernakulam, and thereby committed the offences alleged. Petitioners were arrested on 11.12.2024 and they have been in custody since then.
4. Heard Adv.P.Mohamed Sabah, the learned Counsel for B.A.No.9325 of 2025 4 2025:KER:61503 the petitioners as well as Sri.Noushad K.A., the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been in custody since 11.12.2024. It was submitted that the grounds for arrest were not communicated to the petitioners or their relatives at the time of his arrest.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted that the grounds for arrest were communicated to the petitioners at the time of their arrest. It was also submitted that since the contraband seized from the petitioners was a commercial quantity, the rigour under Section 37 of NDPS Act will apply and hence petitioners ought not to be released on bail.
7. Though prima facie there are materials on record to connect the petitioners with the crime, since petitioners have raised the question of absence of communication of the grounds for his arrest, this Court is obliged to consider the said issue.
8. In the decisions in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India and Others, [(2024) 7 SCC 576], Prabir Purkayastha v. State B.A.No.9325 of 2025 5 2025:KER:61503 (NCT of Delhi) [(2024) 8 SCC 254] and Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana [AIR 2025 SC 1388], it has been held that the requirement of informing a person of grounds for arrest is a mandatory requirement of Article 22(1) and also that the said information must be provided to the arrested person in such a manner that sufficient knowledge of the basic facts constituting the grounds must be communicated to the arrested person effectively in the language which he understands.
9. In a recent decision in Shahina v. State of Kerala [2025 KHC Online 706], this Court has also considered the impact of the aforesaid principles in relation to offences alleged under the NDPS Act and held that the grounds for arrest must be communicated.
10. On a perusal of the case diary it is noticed that the arrest memo contains the specific grounds for arrest of the petitioners. However, the arrest intimation does not indicate that the grounds for arrest were communicated to the near relatives of the petitioners, which only mentions about the provisions of law under which petitioners were arrested. In the absence of any B.A.No.9325 of 2025 6 2025:KER:61503 specific grounds for arrest mentioned in the arrest intimation conveyed to the near relatives of the petitioners, I am satisfied that petitioners have not been communicated with the grounds for arrest.
11. Petitioners have been in custody from 11.12.2024 onwards. Since the grounds for arrest were not communicated to the petitioners soon after the arrest, they are entitled to be released on bail.
In the result, this application is allowed on the following conditions:-
(a) Petitioners shall be released on bail on each of them executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.
(b) Petitioners shall co-operate with the trial of the case.
(c) Petitioners shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall they attempt to tamper with the evidence.B.A.No.9325 of 2025 7
2025:KER:61503
(d) Petitioners shall not commit any similar offences while they are on bail.
(e) Petitioners shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the jurisdictional Court. 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/14/08/2025 B.A.No.9325 of 2025 8 2025:KER:61503 APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 9325/2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure 1 TRUE COPY OF THE CRIME AND OCCURRENCE REPORT IN CRIME NO. 77/2024 OF EXCISE ENFORCEMENT AND ANTI NARCOTIC SPECIAL SQUAD, ERNAKULAM Annexure 2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 01.03.2025 IN CRL.M.C NO. 545/2025 PASSED BY THE COURT OF SESSIONS; ERNAKULAM