Kerala High Court
Musthafa.K.V vs State Of Kerala on 13 June, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
BAIL APPL. NO. 7191 OF 2025
1
2025:KER:42109
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 23RD JYAISHTA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 7191 OF 2025
CRIME NO.357/2025 OF IRITTY POLICE STATION, KANNUR
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 24.05.2025 IN CRMC NO.736 OF
2025 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT,THALASSERY ARISING OUT OF
THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 22.05.2025 IN CRMC NO.708 OF 2025 OF
DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT,THALASSERY
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO. 1 AND 2:
1 MUSTHAFA.K.V.,
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O. M.K.HAMSA,
KURIKKALE VEETTIL,
PURAPPARA, PUNNAD.P.O,
IRITTY,
KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670703
2 ABDUL JALEEL.K.K
AGED 50 YEARS
S/O. IBRAHIM.T.P,
AFREENAS, PURAPPARA,
PUNNAD.P.O, IRITTY,
KANNUR DISTRICT.,
PIN - 670703
BY ADVS.
SRI.CIBI THOMAS
SMT.SWARNA THOMAS
SMT.ANUSREE K.
BAIL APPL. NO. 7191 OF 2025
2
2025:KER:42109
RESPONDENTS/STATE AND COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
IRITTY POLICE STATION, IRITTY. P.O.,
KANNUR DISTRICT., PIN - 670703
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.06.2025,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 7191 OF 2025
3
2025:KER:42109
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
......................................................
B.A. No.7191 of 2025
...................................................
Dated this the 13th day of June, 2025
ORDER
This bail application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS').
2. Petitioners are accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.357/2025 of Iritty Police
Station, Kannur District; registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1) r/w Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023.
3. The prosecution case is that, on 12.04.2025, the first accused
wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant and struck him on his left
ear with a bunch of keys and also stabbed him on his back, while the
second accused assaulted with an iron rod and the third accused kicked
him on his stomach, and thereby committed the offences alleged.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned
Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners have
been falsely arrayed as accused and that they have no involvement in
the alleged crime.
BAIL APPL. NO. 7191 OF 2025
2025:KER:42109
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted
that the allegations against the petitioners are serious in nature and
custodial interrogation is essential.
7. Petitioners are alleged to have assaulted the defacto complainant
causing serious injuries including on the ears. A reading of the wound
certificate reveals that there are two injuries on the ears; one lacerated
wound on the scalp and another wound on the back. However, the FIR
reveals that the overt acts are alleged to have been inflicted by the first
accused while accused 2 and 3 are alleged to have kicked him on the
stomach and hit him with an iron rod on the left hand. Since there is no
corresponding injuries on the left hand, as well as the abdomen, I am of
the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary.
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
interrogation 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
interrogation of the accused is required for the purpose of investigation.
9. In the instant case, the State has not been able to convince this Court
that custodial interrogation is necessary.On a consideration of the
circumstances arising in the case, this Court is of the view that though
the allegations are serious in nature, custodial interrogation of the
petitioners is not required. Further, having regard to the nature of the
BAIL APPL. NO. 7191 OF 2025
2025:KER:42109
offence and the severity of punishment, this Court is of the view that
petitioners are entitled to be released on pre-arrest bail.
10. Accordingly, this application is allowed on the following
conditions:
(a) Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on
25.06.2025 and shall subject himself to interrogation.
(b) If after interrogation, the Investigating Officer proposes to
arrest the petitioners, then, they shall be released on bail on each
of them 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) Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and
when required and shall also co-operate with the investigation.
(d) Petitioners shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the
witnesses; nor shall they tamper with the evidence;
(e) Petitioners shall not commit any similar offences while they
are on bail.
(f) Petitioners 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/16/06/2025
BAIL APPL. NO. 7191 OF 2025
2025:KER:42109
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 7191/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE-I. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.05.2025 IN
CRL.M.C.NO. 736/2025 OF THE SESSIONS COURT,
THALASSERY
ANNEXURE-II. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22.05.2025 IN
CRL.M.C.NO. 708/2025 OF THE SESSIONS COURT,
THALASSERY
ANNEXURE-III. TRUE COPY OF THE WOUND CERTIFICATE DATED
12.04.2025 ISSUED FROM THE TALUK HOSPITAL,
IRITTY TO THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT
