Kerala High Court
Afsal vs State Of Kerala on 8 August, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
2025:KER:59565
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 17TH SRAVANA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 9009 OF 2025
CRIME NO.1551/2022 OF KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION,
THRISSUR AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 14.03.2025 IN
BAIL APPL. NO.3459 OF 2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
PETITIONER:
AFSAL,
AGED 28 YEARS,
S/O ASHARAF RAMANATHU VEEDU,
KANDANISSERY DESOM, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
PIN - 680 102.
BY ADVS.
SHRI.FRANCIS ASSISI
SHRI.AJEESH S.BRITE
SMT.AMRUTHA P S
SMT.MANJU LUCKOSE
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
08.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl. No.9009 of 2025
2025:KER:59565
-2-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
--------------------------------------
Bail Appl. No.9009 of 2025
------------------------------------
Dated this the 8th 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.1551 of
2022 of Kunnamkulam Police Station, Thrissur, registered for the
offences punishable under sections 22(c) and 29 of the Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS
Act').
3. According to the prosecution, on 30.12.2022, the
accused were found in possession of 91 grams of MDMA and
thereby committed the offences alleged. Petitioner was arrested
on 30.12.2022, and he has been in custody since then.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner has been in custody since 30.12.2022. 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
2025:KER:59565
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 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.
8. In a recent decision in Shahina v. State of Kerala
(2025 KHC Online 706), this Court has also considered the impact
2025:KER:59565
of the aforesaid principles in relation to offences alleged under
the NDPS Act and held that the grounds for arrest must be
communicated.
9. On a perusal of the arrest memo, it is noticed that
there is no reference to any grounds for arrest and the only
reference is to the provisions of law under which the petitioner
has been arrested. Further, there is no specific intimation of
arrest except for reference in the remand report that the
petitioner's father had been intimated about his arrest. However,
there is no material to indicate that the grounds for arrest were
intimated to a near relative of the petitioner. In such
circumstances, I am satisfied that the petitioner had not been
communicated with the grounds for arrest.
10. Petitioner has been in custody from 30.12.2022
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.
2025:KER:59565
(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 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:59565
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 9009/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure-I A TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 17-10-2023
IN BAIL APPL.7926/2023 OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT.
Annexure-II A TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 29-05-2024
IN BAIL APPL.3259/2024 OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT.
Annexure-III A TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 29-01-2025
IN BAIL APPL.10952/2024 OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT.
Annexure-IV A TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 14-03-2025
IN BAIL APPL.3459/2025 OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT.
Annexure-V A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER CRL.MP
NO.2054/2025 DATED 09/05/2025 OF IIIRD
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT,
AT THRISSUR.
Annexure-VI A TRUE COPY OF THE SEIZURE MAHAZAR
DATED 30/12/2022.
Annexure-VII A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER CRL.MP
NO.3254/2025 DATED 19/07/2025 OF IIIRD
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT,
AT THRISSUR.
