Kerala High Court
Rahul.B vs State Of Kerala on 5 August, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
2025:KER:58466
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. 8950 OF 2025
CRIME NO.507/2025 OF SASTHAMCOTTA POLICE STATION,
KOLLAM AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 08.07.2025 IN CRMC
NO.1568 OF 2025 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT / RENT
CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY, KOLLAM.
PETITIONER:
RAHUL.B.,
AGED 30 YEARS,
S/O.BALACHANDRAN PILLAI, THAZHATHUVADAKKATHIL,
PALLISSERIKKAL P.O, SASTHAMCOTTA,
KOLLAM, PIN - 690 521.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.SIJU
SMT.ANJANA KANNATH
SMT.SAFNA P.S.
SHRI.GAUTHAM SIJU
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682 031.
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
SASTHAMCOTTA POLICE STATION,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690 521.
SMT. SREEJA V., PP
BailAppl. No.8950 of 2025
2025:KER:58466
-2-
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
BailAppl. No.8950 of 2025
2025:KER:58466
-3-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS., J
--------------------------------------
Bail Appl. No.8950 of 2025
------------------------------------
Dated this the 5th 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.507 of 2025
of Sasthamcotta Police Station, Kollam, registered for the offences
punishable under sections 189(2), 191(2), 296(b), 126(2), 115(2) and
110 r/w Section 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short
'BNS').
3. According to the prosecution, on 14.03.2025, the accused
had restrained the de facto complainant and assaulted him using a
bottle, resulting in injury and thereby committed the offences alleged.
4. I have heard Sri.K Siju., the learned counsel for the
petitioner as well as Smt. Sreeja V., 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.
2025:KER:58466
7. Petitioner is alleged to have abused the de facto
complainant while the first accused had assaulted him on his head with
a bottle, resulting in injury. The first and third accused have already
been arrested, and they have been released on bail. However, the
petitioner remains at large.
8. Considering the nature of allegations against the
petitioner, especially since he is alleged to have only abused the
de facto complainant, I am of the view that custodial interrogation of
the petitioner is not necessary. However, he must appear for
interrogation.
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
2025:KER:58466
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 on conditions.
Accordingly, this application is allowed on the following
conditions:
(a) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on
13.08.2025 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
2025:KER:58466
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
2025:KER:58466
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 8950/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 THE COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO. 507/2025 OF
SASTHAMCOTTA POLICE STATION DATED
15.03.2025.
Annexure A2 THE COPY OF ORDER IN CRL.M.C NO.
1568/2025 DATED 08.07.2025 ON THE FILE
OF SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM.
