Kerala High Court
Adarsh vs State Of Kerala on 14 July, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
2025:KER:51626
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 23RD ASHADHA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 8085 OF 2025
CRIME NO.915/2024 OF VELLARADA POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED
03.03.2025 IN BAIL APPL. NO.2762 OF 2025 OF HIGH COURT OF
KERALA.
PETITIONER:
ADARSH,
AGED 47 YEARS,
S/O SASIDHARAN, GOWRI NANDHANAM, VENJARAMOODU,
KUTTIMOODU, THIRUANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 607.
BY ADVS.
SRI.M.VIVEK
SMT.RENEETA VINU
SHRI.M.R.MADHU
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682 031.
SRI. NOUSHAD K. A. (PP)
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl. No.8085 of 2025
2025:KER:51626
-2-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
--------------------------------------
Bail Appl. No.8085 of 2025
------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th day of July, 2025
ORDER
This bail application is filed under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS').
2. Petitioner is the fourth accused in Crime No.915 of 2024 of Vellarada Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, registered for the offences punishable under sections 20(b)(ii)(C) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS Act').
3. According to the prosecution on 27.09.2024, the accused were found in possession while transporting 136.05 Kg of Ganja in an Innova car bearing Reg. No.KL-24-E-7556 and thereby committed the offences alleged.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 28.09.2024. It was submitted that the grounds for arrest were not communicated to the petitioner or his relatives at the time of his arrest.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail Bail Appl. No.8085 of 2025 2025:KER:51626 -3- application and submitted that the grounds for arrest were communicated to the petitioner at the time of his arrest. It was also submitted that since the contraband seized from the petitioner was a commercial quantity, the rigour under Section 37 of NDPS Act will apply and hence petitioner ought not to be released on bail.
6. Though prima facie there are materials on record to connect the petitioner with the crime, since petitioner has raised the question of absence of communication of the grounds for his arrest, this Court is obliged to consider the said issue.
7. In the decisions in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India and Others, [(2024) 7 SCC 576], Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi) [(2024) 8 SCC 254] and Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana [2025 SCC Online SC 269], it has been held that the requirement of informing a person of grounds of arrest is a mandatory requirement of Article 22(1) and also that the information of the grounds of arrest must be provided to the arrested person in such a manner that sufficient knowledge of the basic facts confuting the grounds imparted and communicate to the arrested person effectively in the language which he understands.
8. 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 Bail Appl. No.8085 of 2025 2025:KER:51626 -4- NDPS Act and held that the grounds for arrest must be communicated.
9. In the instant case, it is seen that in the FI statement, seizure mahazar and in the arrest intimation, there is a reference that the petitioner has been arrested compliance with the legal requirements. There is nothing specifically mentioned about the grounds for arrest. Vague statements would not suffice the constitutional requirement of communicating the grounds for arrest. Though the arrest was intimated to the brother of the petitioner, the same by itself would not satisfy the requirement as observed by the Supreme Court in the decisions mentioned above.
10. Petitioner has been in custody from 28.09.2024 onwards. Since the grounds for arrest was not communicated to the petitioner as soon after the arrest, petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.
In the result, this application is allowed on the following conditions:-
(a) Petitioner shall be released on bail on him 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) Petitioner shall co-operate with the trial of the case.
(c) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he attempt to tamper with the Bail Appl. No.8085 of 2025 2025:KER:51626 -5- evidence.
(d) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail.
(e) Petitioner 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 ADS Bail Appl. No.8085 of 2025 2025:KER:51626 -6- APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 8085/2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure -A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.M.P.NO:
1977 OF 2025 DATED 13-06-2025 OF THE HON'BLE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT- IV, THIRUANANTHAPURAM.