Kerala High Court
Shihab.K vs State Of Kerala on 19 August, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
2025:KER:62334
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 28TH SRAVANA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 9253 OF 2025
CRIME NO.126/2024 OF MANANTHAVADY EXCISE RANGE
OFFICE, WAYANAD AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 15.07.2025
IN CRMC NO.534 OF 2025 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT &
SESSIONS COURT - II & RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY,
KALPETTA.
PETITIONER:
SHIHAB.K.,
AGED 32 YEARS,
S/O. YUSUF.K.P, KOLOTHPYIL HOUSE, PONOOR,
ULLIKULAM, THAMARASSERY TALUK ,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673 574.
BY ADV SRI.P.C.MUHAMMED NOUSHIQ
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031.
SRI. PRASANTH M.P., PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
19.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl. No.9253 of 2025
2025:KER:62334
-2-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
--------------------------------------
Bail Appl. No.9253 of 2025
------------------------------------
Dated this the 19th 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.126 of 2024
of Excise Range Office, Mananthavady, 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 26.12.2024, the
accused were found in possession while transporting 60.077 grams
of methamphetamine in a Maruti Suzuki Waganor car bearing Reg.
No.KA-05-LA-5581 and thereby committed the offences alleged.
Petitioner was arrested on 26.12.2024, and he has been in custody
since then.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner has been in custody since 26.12.2024. It was
submitted that the grounds for arrest were not communicated to the
petitioner or his relatives at the time of his arrest.
2025:KER:62334
5. 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.
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:62334
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 case diary, it is noticed that the
arrest memo contains specific grounds for arrest. However, the
arrest intimation refers only to the factum of possession of
contraband by the accused while there is no reference to the
quantum of contraband. The significance of the quantum of
contraband in the arrest intimation arises when the statutory
provisions of the NDPS Act are borne in mind. The quantum of
contraband determines whether an offence is a bailable offence or a
non bailable offence and also as to whether it is an intermediate
quantity or commercial quantity. Therefore, when it comes to
offences under the NDPS Act, the quantum of contraband seized
and possessed by the accused has relevance. Since, in the instant
case, the quantity of contraband seized had not been mentioned in
the arrest intimation, I am satisfied that the propositions of law as
laid down by the Supreme Court in Vihaan Kumar (Supra) and
Kassireddy v. State of Andra Pradesh [(2025) SCC Online SC
1228] have not been complied with.
10. Petitioner has been in custody from 26.12.2024
onwards. Since the grounds for arrest were not communicated to
2025:KER:62334
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
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:62334
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 9253/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.07.2025
IN CRL.M.C. NO. 534 OF 2025 ON THE FILES
OF SPECIAL JUDGE (NDPS ACT
CASES)/ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE-II,
KALPETTA.
