Kerala High Court
Muhammed Thuyyub vs State Of Kerala on 25 July, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
2025:KER:55285
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 3RD SRAVANA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 8798 OF 2025
CRIME NO.79/2024 OF MALAPPURAM EXCISE RANGE OFFICE,
MALAPPURAM AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 20.05.2025 IN
BAIL APPL. NO.5742 OF 2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
PETITIONER:
MUHAMMED THUYYUB,
AGED 30 YEARS,
S/O. MUHAMMEDALI M.K, AYANIKUNNAN HOUSE,
SOUTH BAZAR, NEAR SOUTH SCHOOL DESOM,
KUTTIPURAM VILLAGE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 679 571.
BY ADV SRI.P.C.MUHAMMED NOUSHIQ
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
25.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl. No.8798 of 2025
2025:KER:55285
-2-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
--------------------------------------
Bail Appl. No.8798 of 2025
------------------------------------
Dated this the 25th day of July, 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.79 of 2024 of
Manjeri Excise Range Office, Malappuram, 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, the accused was found in
possession of 5.283 grams of methamphetamine, and after he was
arrested, pursuant to a confession statement, a further quantity of
244.069 grams of methamphetamine was recovered from the
possession of the second accused. The accused were arrested on
17.12.2024 and has been in custody since then.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner has been in custody since 17.12.2024. It was
submitted that the grounds for arrest were not communicated to the
petitioner or his relatives at the time of his arrest.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail
2025:KER:55285
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
information of the grounds of arrest must be provided to the
arrested person in such a manner that sufficient knowledge of the
basic facts confuting the grounds imparted and communicate 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 of
the aforesaid principles in relation to offences alleged under the
2025:KER:55285
NDPS Act and held that the grounds for arrest must be
communicated.
9. In the instant case, initially the petitioner was arrested
possessing 5.283 grams of methamphetamine while the remaining
quantity was recovered pursuant to his confession statement. In
the arrest memo as noticed from the case diary, which was handed
over across the Bar by the learned Public Prosecutor, it is seen that
there is a specific reference to the petitioner being in possession
5.283 grams of methamphetamine, resulting in his arrest. The said
arrest memo contains the petitioner's signature as well as his finger
print. Further, in the arrest notice also there is specific reference to
the petitioner being found in possession of 5.283 grams of
methamphetamine and intimation of the said arrest was given to his
mother on 17.12.2024 itself.
In view of the above documents, I am satisfied that the
petitioner has been communicated with the grounds for arrest.
Hence, there is no merit in this bail application, and it is dismissed.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
ADS
2025:KER:55285
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 8798/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.05.2025
IN BA NO. 5742 OF 2025 ON THE FILES OF
HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28.06.2025
IN CRL.M.P. NO. 735 OF 2025 ON THE FILES
OF SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST (POA) ACT &
NDPS ACT CASES, MANJERI.
