Kerala High Court
Ajith A.A vs State Of Kerala on 6 August, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
2025:KER:58829
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 15TH SRAVANA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 8918 OF 2025
CRIME NO.436/2025 OF MARARIKULAM POLICE STATION,
ALAPPUZHA AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 21.06.2025 IN CRMC
NO.772 OF 2025 OF DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT/RENT CONTROL
APPELLATE AUTHORITY, ALAPPUZHA.
PETITIONER:
AJITH A.A.,
AGED 40 YEARS,
ASHALAYAM, CHERUVARANAM, VARANAM P.O,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688 555.
BY ADVS.
SMT.M.A.SULFIA
SRI.ABDUL JALEEL.A
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031.
SMT. SREEJA V., PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl. No.8918 of 2025
2025:KER:58829
-2-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
--------------------------------------
Bail Appl. No.8918 of 2025
------------------------------------
Dated this the 6th 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 accused in Crime No.436 of 2025 of
Mararikkulam Police Station, Alappuzha, registered for the offences
punishable under sections 296(b), 324 (2), 351(3) and 118(1) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS').
3. According to the prosecution, on 02.06.2025, accused
assaulted the de facto complainant with a knife and threatened him,
causing damage to the front side of the vehicle causing a loss of
Rs.5,000/- and thereby committed the offences alleged.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as 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
and submitted that his custodial interrogation is necessary.
2025:KER:58829
7. Petitioner is alleged to have, due to an enmity that arose
out of the de facto complainant honking his horn, assaulted the
de facto complainant on 02.06.2025, with a knife and threatened him
and also caused damage to the scooter driven by him and thereby
committed the offences alleged.
8. The de facto complainant was assaulted by the accused,
since he had sounded his horn to pave the way for his movement. The
injuries inflicted are not grievous or serious. Considering the nature of
injuries as well as the nature of allegations, I am of the view that the
petitioner can be protected with an order of pre-arrest bail.
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:58829
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.
Accordingly, this application is allowed on the following
conditions:
(a) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on
18.08.2025 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:58829
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:58829
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 8918/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME
NO.436/2025 DATED 02/06/2025 OF
MARARIKULAM POLICE STATION.
Annexure A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER IN CRL.M.C.
NO.772/2025 DATED 21/06/2025 BY THE
LEARNED SESSIONS JUDGE, ALAPPUZHA.
