Muhammed Nijas vs State Of Kerala
2025 Latest Caselaw 1857 Ker

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 1857 Ker
Judgement Date : 1 August, 2025

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

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

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.

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