Kerala High Court
Badusha vs State Of Kerala on 11 August, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
B.A.No.9091 of 2025 1
2025:KER:60071
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 20TH SRAVANA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 9091 OF 2025
CRIME NO.75/2025 OF Palluruthy Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 10.07.2025 IN Bail Appl.
NO.6388 OF 2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED:
BADUSHA, AGED 30 YEARS 13/925, AMBALATHU HOUSE,
KULACHI PARAMBU, HI TECH CENTRE, KARUVELIPADY,
KOCHI, PIN-682002
BY ADVS.
SHRI.ARJUN S.
SMT.CHITHRA MOL R.
SMT.ANJU P.V.
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
BY SRI.PRASANTH M.P., PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.9091 of 2025 2
2025:KER:60071
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
......................................................
B.A.No.9091 of 2025
...................................................
Dated this the 11th 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.75 of 2025 of
Palluruthy Kasaba Police Station, Ernakulam, registered for the
offence punishable under Section 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [for brevity, 'NDPS Act'].
3. Prosecution alleges that on 30.01.2025, pursuant to an
anonymous information received by the detecting officer,
petitioner was found to be in possession of 108.938 grams of
MDMA, during a search of his residence, kept in five zip lock
pouches and thereby the accused committed the offences alleged.
Petitioner was arrested on 02.02.2025 and he has been in custody
since then.
4. Heard Sri.Arjun S., the learned Counsel for the
2025:KER:60071
petitioner as well as Sri.Prasanth M.P., the learned Public
Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner has been in custody since 02.02.2025. 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
2025:KER:60071
(NCT of Delhi) [(2024) 8 SCC 254] and Vihaan Kumar v.
State of Haryana [AIR 2025 SC 1388], it has been held that the
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 does not contain the grounds for arrest, except for a
reference to the provisions of law. Similarly, in the arrest intimation
also there is nothing to indicate that the grounds for arrest have
been communicated. In such circumstances, I am satisfied that
petitioner has not been communicated with the grounds for arrest
2025:KER:60071
and hence petitioner's arrest stands vitiated.
11. Petitioner has been in custody from 02.02.2025
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.
2025:KER:60071
(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
sp/11/08/2025
2025:KER:60071
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 9091/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 TRUE COPY OF CR.NO.75 OF 2025 OF
PALLURUTHY KASABA POLICE STATION
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT DTD 31.01.2025
Annexure 2 TRUE COPY OF THE SEIZURE MAHAZAR DTD
30.01.2025
Annexure 3 TRUE COPY OF THE ARREST MEMO DTD
02.02.2025 IN CR.NO.75 OF 2025 OF
PALLURUTHY KASABA POLICE STATION
Annexure 4 TRUE COPY OF THE CUSTODY MEMO IN CR.NO.75
OF 2025 OF PALLURUTHY KASABA POLICE
STATION
Annexure 5 TRUE COPY OF THE REMAND REPORT DTD
03.02.2025 IN CR.NO.75 OF 2025 OF
PALLURUTHY KASABA POLICE STATION
Annexure 6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE 1ST
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT-ERNAKULAM IN
CRL.MC.NO.920/2025 DTD 08.04.2025
