Kerala High Court
Habeeb Rahman P.P vs State Of Kerala on 5 August, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
B.A.No.8913 of 2025 1
2025:KER:58203
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 14TH SRAVANA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 8913 OF 2025
CRIME NO.289/2024 OF Thirunelly Police Station, Wayanad
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 01.07.2025 IN Bail Appl.
NO.7751 OF 2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1:
HABEEB RAHMAN P.P., AGED 46 YEARS
S/O ABOOBACKERKUTTY MUSLIYAR,
PUTHEN PEEDIYEKKAL HOUSE, VALIYAPARAMBA P.O,
KIZHAKOTHU VILLAGE, THAMARASSERY TALUK,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,, PIN - 673572
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.MOHAMED SABAH
SRI.LIBIN STANLEY
SMT.SAIPOOJA
SRI.SADIK ISMAYIL
SMT.R.GAYATHRI
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
B.A.No.8913 of 2025 2
2025:KER:58203
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
THIRUNELLI POLICE STATION, THIRUNELLI P.O,
WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 670646
SRI. PRASANTH M.P., PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.8913 of 2025 3
2025:KER:58203
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
......................................................
B.A.No.8913 of 2025
...................................................
Dated this the 5th day of August, 2025
ORDER
This bail application is filed under section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS').
2. Petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.289 of 2024
of Thirunelli Police Station, Wayanad, registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 22(c) and 29(1) of the Narcotic Drugs
and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [for brevity, 'NDPS Act'].
3. According to the prosecution, on 04.07.2024 at about
7.50 a.m., accused were found in possession of 148.5 grams of
MDMA, while travelling in a car bearing registration
No.KL-57T- 2000 and thereby committed the offences alleged.
Petitioner was arrested on 04.07.2024 and he has been in custody
since then.
4. Heard Adv.P.Mohamed Sabah, the learned Counsel for
the petitioner as well as Sri.Prasanth M.P., the learned Public
Prosecutor.
2025:KER:58203
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner has been in custody from 04.07.2024. It was
submitted that the grounds for arrest were not communicated to
the petitioner or his 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 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.
7. 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.
8. 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 [AIR 2025 SC 1388], it has been held that the
2025:KER:58203
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 grounds for arrest, while no arrest
intimation was given to any of the petitioner's relatives. In view of
the failure to provide intimation of arrest or the grounds for arrest
to the relatives of the petitioner, I am satisfied that petitioner has
not been communicated with the grounds for arrest. In such
circumstances, petitioner's arrest is vitiated.
11. Petitioner has been in custody from 04.07.2024
2025:KER:58203
onwards. Since the grounds for arrest were not communicated to
the petitioner 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
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
2025:KER:58203
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/05/08/2025
2025:KER:58203
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 8913/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT
IN CRIME NO. 289/2024 OF THIRUNELLI
POLICE STATION, WAYANAD DISTRICT
Annexure 2 TRUE COPY OF THE SEIZURE MAHAZAR IN CRIME
NO. 289/2024 OF THIRUNELLI POLICE
STATION, WAYANAD DISTRICT
Annexure 5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11.12.2024
IN B.A NO. 8790/2024 PASSED BY THIS
HON'BLE COURT
