Saturday, 09, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Praveen vs State Of Kerala
2025 Latest Caselaw 12562 Ker

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 12562 Ker
Judgement Date : 23 December, 2025

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Praveen vs State Of Kerala on 23 December, 2025

                                                             2025:KER:98786

BAIL APPL. NO.14316 OF 2025

                                    1


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                 PRESENT

            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALEE KRISHNA S.

     TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 / 2ND POUSHA, 1947

                     BAIL APPL. NO. 14316 OF 2025

   CRIME NO.838/2025 OF Wadakkanchery Police Station, Thrissur

      AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 18.11.2025 IN Bail Appl. NO.13576 OF

                     2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

PETITIONER/FIRST ACCUSED:
           PRAVEEN
           AGED 28 YEARS
           SON OF THOMAS SUNNY,
           VALANCHERY HOUSE, PULLAMKANDAM DESOM,
           MANALITHARA VILLAGE,
           THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680589

            BY ADVS.
            SHRI.APPU AJITH
            SHRI.K.T.SIDHIQ
            SMT.SHYNI DAS J.S.


RESPONDENT(S)/STATE:
           STATE OF KERALA
           REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
           KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031

            PP ADV. M.P PRASANTH (PP)


     THIS   BAIL   APPLICATION   HAVING    COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
23.12.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
                                                              2025:KER:98786

BAIL APPL. NO.14316 OF 2025

                                      2




                                 ORDER

This Bail Application is filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 ( for short 'BNSS').

2. Petitioner herein is the 1 st accused in Crime No.838 of 2025

of Wadakkanchery Police Station, Thrissur registered for the offence

punishable under Section 112(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for

short 'BNS').

3. The prosecution case is that, the accused committed a

financial crime by withdrawing Rs.2,90,000/- on 08.05.2025 using the

accused's account bearing No.21800100010477 in Thrissur Poonkunnam

Federal Bank on behalf of organized financial crimes in various places,

with the intention and care to make financial profit as a member of the

group that illegally participated in financial crimes for the accused's

excessive profit. Thus, the accused allegedly committed the above

offence.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

Public Prosecutor.

2025:KER:98786

BAIL APPL. NO.14316 OF 2025

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner has been in judicial custody from 31.10.2025 and this is the

second bail petition moved by him. He is ready to cooperate with the

investigation.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

7. It is a well accepted principle that bail is the rule and jail is

the exception. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chidambaram. P v

Directorate of Enforcement [(2020) 13 SCC 791] after considering

all the earlier judgments, observed that, the basic jurisprudence relating

to bail remains the same inasmuch as the grant of bail is the rule and

refusal is the exception so as to ensure that the accused has the

opportunity of securing fair trial.

8. Moreover, in Jalaluddin Khan v. Union of India [2024

KHC 6431], the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that:

"21. Before we part with the Judgment, we must mention here that the Special Court and the High Court did not consider the material in the charge sheet objectively. Perhaps the focus was more on the activities of PFI, and therefore, the appellant's case could not be properly appreciated. When a case is made out for a grant of bail, the Courts should not have any hesitation in granting bail. The 2025:KER:98786

BAIL APPL. NO.14316 OF 2025

allegations of the prosecution may be very serious. But, the duty of the Courts is to consider the case for grant of bail in accordance with the law. "Bail is the rule and jail is an exception" is a settled law. Even in a case like the present case where there are stringent conditions for the grant of bail in the relevant statutes, the same rule holds good with only modification that the bail can be granted if the conditions in the statute are satisfied. The rule also means that once a case is made out for the grant of bail, the Court cannot decline to grant bail. If the Courts start denying bail in deserving cases, it will be a violation of the rights guaranteed under Art.21 of our Constitution."

9. In Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of Enforcement [2024

KHC 6426], the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that:

"53. The Court further observed that, over a period of time, the trial courts and the High Courts have forgotten a very well - settled principle of law that bail is not to be withheld as a punishment. From our experience, we can say that it appears that the trial courts and the High Courts attempt to play safe in matters of grant of bail. The principle that bail is a rule and refusal is an exception is, at times, followed in breach. On account of non - grant of bail even in straight forward open and shut cases, this Court is flooded with huge number of bail petitions thereby adding to the huge pendency. It is high time that the trial courts and the High Courts should recognize the principle that "bail is rule and jail is exception"."

2025:KER:98786

BAIL APPL. NO.14316 OF 2025

10. Considering the dictum laid down in the above decisions

and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Bail

Application is allowed with the following directions:

1. The petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond

for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent

sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the

jurisdictional Court.

2. The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer

for interrogation as and when he is required to do so in

writing, apart from the days mentioned above, till the

completion of the investigation.

3. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and

shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat

or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case

so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the

Court or to the investigating officer.

4. The petitioner shall not leave India without permission of

the jurisdictional Court.

2025:KER:98786

BAIL APPL. NO.14316 OF 2025

5. The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the

offence of which he is accused.

6. It is made clear that if any of the above conditions are

violated by the petitioner, the prosecution is at liberty to

approach the jurisdictional Court for cancellation of bail in

accordance with law.

SD/-

MURALEE KRISHNA S.,

JUDGE

JJ 2025:KER:98786

BAIL APPL. NO.14316 OF 2025

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. NO. 14316 OF 2025

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR CRIME NO. 838/2025 OF WADAKKANCHERY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT DATED 31/10/2025 Annexure A2 A TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN CRIMINAL M P NO.4318 OF 2025 IN CR. NO 837/2025, WADAKKANCHERY PS DATED 31/10/2025 Annexure A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN BA 13576/2025 DATED 18/11/2025 Annexure A4 A TRUE COPY OF THE BAIL ORDER IN CMP 4460/2025 BEFORE THE JFCM WADAKKANCHERI DATED 12/11/2025

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter