Kerala High Court
Suresh vs State Of Kerala on 4 June, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
BAIL APPL. NO. 6656 OF 2025
1
2025:KER:39354
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 14TH JYAISHTA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 6656 OF 2025
CRIME NO.259/2025 OF PEERUMEDU POLICE STATION, IDUKKI
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 05.05.2025 IN CRMC NO.286 OF
2025 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT,THODUPUZHA
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2:
SURESH
AGED 49 YEARS
S/O T.P.CHACKO, GLENMARY PUTHUVAL,
GLENMARY PO, ELAPPARA VILLAGE,
IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685531
BY ADVS.
SRI.BIJU .C. ABRAHAM
SHRI.THOMAS C.ABRAHAM
SHRI.BASIL MATHEW
RESPONDENT/STATE:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682031
SRI. NOUSHAD K.A. (PP)
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.06.2025,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 6656 OF 2025
2
2025:KER:39354
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
......................................................
B.A. No.6656 of 2025
...................................................
Dated this the 4th day of June, 2025
ORDER
This bail application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS').
2. Petitioner is the second accused in Crime No.259/2025 of Peermade
Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections
118(1), 296(b) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. The prosecution case is that, on 14.03.2025, due to a previous animosity
towards the de facto complainant and his family members, accused had
abused the wife of the de facto complainant and pelted a stone at her,
causing grievous hurt and thereby committed the offences alleged.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public
Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner has been
falsely arrayed as an accused and has no involvement in the alleged
crime.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted
that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature and
BAIL APPL. NO. 6656 OF 2025
2025:KER:39354
custodial interrogation is essential.
7. In Sushila Aggarwal and Others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and
Another [(2020) 5 SCC 1], it was held that while considering whether to
grant anticipatory bail or not, Courts ought to be generally guided by
considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role
attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case. Grant of
anticipatory bail is a matter of discretion and the kind of conditions to be
imposed or not to be imposed are all dependent on facts of each case,
and subject to the discretion of the court.
8. In Ashok Kumar v. State of Union Territory Chandigarh [2024 SCC
OnLine SC 274], it has been held that a mere assertion on the part of the
State while opposing the plea for anticipatory bail that custodial
investigation is required would not be sufficient and that the State would
have to show or indicate more than prima facie case as to why custodial
investigation of the accused is required for the purpose of investigation.
In the instant case, the State has not been able to convince this Court
that custodial interrogation is necessary.
9. Considering the nature of offences alleged and also the overt acts
alleged against the petitioner, I am of the view that custodial
interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Further, having read to the
nature of the offence and the severity of punishment,this Court is of the
view that petitioner is entitled to be released on pre-arrest bail.
10. Accordingly, this application is allowed on the following
conditions:
BAIL APPL. NO. 6656 OF 2025
2025:KER:39354
(a) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on
17.06.2025 and shall subject himself to interrogation.
(b) If after interrogation, the Investigating Officer proposes to
arrest the petitioner, then, he shall be released on bail on him
executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only)
with two solvent sureties each for the like sum before the
Investigating Officer.
(c) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as
and when required and shall also co-operate with the
investigation.
(d) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the
witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence.
(e) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is
on bail.
(f) Petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the
Court having jurisdiction.
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
AMV/05/06/2025
BAIL APPL. NO. 6656 OF 2025
2025:KER:39354
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 6656/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE 1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05/05/2025
PASSED BY THE SESSIONS COURT, THODUPUZHA IN
ANNEXURE 2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 15/03/2024
PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF COURT, PEERMADE IN O.S.
ANNEXURE 3 TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE DATED 15/03/2024
PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF COURT, PEERMADE IN O.S.
