Kerala High Court
Abdul Mufashir vs State Of Kerala on 23 August, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
B.A.No.9930 of 2025 1
2025:KER:64344
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
SATURDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 1ST BHADRA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 9930 OF 2025
CRIME NO.587/2024 OF Kalpakanchery Police Station, Malappuram
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 02.06.2025 IN Bail
Appl. NO.6403 OF 2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
ABDUL MUFASHIR
AGED 31 YEARS
S/O MOOSA K, KUVVAKKAD HOUSE,
KUTTAYI, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 676562
BY ADVS.
SRI.SAM ISAAC POTHIYIL
SMT.S.SURAJA
SHRI.MUHAMMED SUHAIR C.A
SHRI.ABHILASH C.V.
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
PIN - 682031
B.A.No.9930 of 2025 2
2025:KER:64344
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
KALPAKANCHERY POLICE STATION,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676551
SMT. SREEJA V., PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.9930 of 2025 3
2025:KER:64344
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
......................................................
B.A.No.9930 of 2025
...................................................
Dated this the 23rd 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 accused in Crime No.587 of 2024 of
Kalpakanchery Police Station, Malappuram, registered for the
offence punishable under Section 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [for brevity, 'NDPS Act'].
3. According to the prosecution, on 18.05.2024 at about
8.45 p.m., accused was found in possession of a total quantity of
70.96 grams of MDMA and 36.74 grams of hashish oil and thereby
committed the offences alleged. Petitioner was arrested on
18.05.2024 and he has been in custody since then.
4. Heard Sri.Sam Isaac Pothiyil, the learned Counsel for
the petitioner as well as Smt.Sreeja V., the learned Public
Prosecutor.
2025:KER:64344
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
petitioner has been in custody since 18.05.2024. 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 (NCT of Delhi) [(2024) 8 SCC 254] and Vihaan Kumar
v. State of Haryana [AIR 2025 SC 1388], it has been held that
2025:KER:64344
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 contains no grounds for arrest, except referring to
the provisions of law. Similarly, in the arrest intimation also, there
is no reference to the grounds for arrest. In view of the failure to
provide the intimation of arrest or the grounds for arrest to the
relatives of the petitioner, I am satisfied that petitioner has not
been communicated with the grounds for arrest. In such
circumstances, petitioner's arrest is vitiated.
2025:KER:64344
11. Petitioner has been in custody from 18.05.2024
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.
(e) Petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without
the permission of the jurisdictional Court.
2025:KER:64344
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/23/08/2025
2025:KER:64344
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 9930/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
02.06.2025 IN B.A. NO. 6403/2025
