Kerala High Court
Saidali.M.J vs State Of Kerala on 4 November, 2025
Author: Kauser Edappagath
Bench: Kauser Edappagath
BAIL APPL. NO. 13259 OF 2025
1
2025:KER:83174
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 / 13TH KARTHIKA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 13259 OF 2025
CRIME NO.1267/2025 OF VARKALA POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 08.10.2025 IN BAIL APPL.
NO.10995 OF 2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
1 SAIDALI.M.J
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O MUJEEB, RESIDING AT SAIDALI MANZIL ASARIMUKKU,
CHAVARCODE, NAVAIKULAM, PARIPALLY,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691574
2 NAISAM.P
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O NABEESA, RESIDING AT PUTHUVAL PUTHEN VEEDU,
THODUWAY, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695141
BY ADV SMT.HAIRA
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
BAIL APPL. NO. 13259 OF 2025
2
2025:KER:83174
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VARKKALA POLICE STATION
VARKALA KALLAMBALAM RD, VARKALA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695141
SRI.SANGEETHA RAJ.N.R-PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.11.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 13259 OF 2025
3
2025:KER:83174
ORDER
This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking pre-arrest bail.
2. The applicants are the accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime
No.1267 of 2025 of Varkala Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram.
The offences alleged are punishable under Sections, 126(2),
296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 21.08.2025
around 02.15 p.m., in front of the Government Taluk Hospital,
Varkala, when the victim and his friend Shamseer were returning
from the said hospital on a scooter, after accompanying Aparna,
(an SFI leader) for the medical consultation, the applicants
altogether obstructed them. The accused No.1 showered obscene
language at him, threatened his life and manhandled him. The
accused No.2 pulled his right hand and wallop onto the ground
and when he fell on the ground, the accused Nos.1 to 3 stamped
on his head, chest and back. Then accused No.1 pinned his shirt
BAIL APPL. NO. 13259 OF 2025
2025:KER:83174
and threatened him that he will be finished off, if he will reach in
front of the said college and punched below his right eye, right
shoulder and lips with an iron punch. At the same time, accused
No.2 punched his chest and all the accused together threatened
his friend Shamseer that if he interferes, he won't continue his
college studies.
4. I have heard Smt.Haira Solomon, the learned counsel
for the applicants and Sri.Sangeetha Raj.N.R, the learned Public
Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.
5. The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that
the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in
the present case. The counsel further submitted that no
materials are on record to connect the applicants with the alleged
crime; hence, they are entitled to get bail. The learned Public
Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged
incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the
applicants, and if they are released on bail at this stage, it will
affect the course of the investigation.
BAIL APPL. NO. 13259 OF 2025
2025:KER:83174
6. The law regarding the grant or refusal of pre-arrest
bail is well settled. Pre-arrest bail cannot be granted as a matter
of course. The power u/s 482 of BNSS could be exercised only
when a special case is made out, that too, recording reasons
thereof. Perusal of the case diary reveals that the accusation
made against the applicants are very serious in nature and it
prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on their part. In
the FIS, specific overt act has been alleged against the applicants.
The wound certificate would show that the de facto complainant
sustained grievous injury to his teeth. The weapon used for the
commission of offence has not been recovered so far.
The investigation is in a preliminary stage. The custodial
interrogation of the applicants is necessary for the investigation.
As rightly argued by the learned Public Prosecutor, the
possibility of the applicants influencing the witnesses and
interfering with the investigation cannot be ruled out if they are
released on bail. Moreover, the applicants have criminal
antecedents. Considering the gravity of the offence, criminal
BAIL APPL. NO. 13259 OF 2025
2025:KER:83174
antecedents of the applicants and stage of the investigation, it is
not a fit case where extra ordinary jurisdiction vested with this
Court u/s 482 of BNSS could be invoked. The bail application is,
accordingly, dismissed.
Sd/-
DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE
AS
BAIL APPL. NO. 13259 OF 2025
2025:KER:83174
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 13259/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE 1 THE TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE COMPLAINT
DATED 23.08.2025 SUBMITTED BY MRS.SHEEBA
TO THE DGP, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
ANNEXURE 2 THE TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE OP TICKET
OF THE TALUK HOSPITAL, VARKALA DATED
21.08.2025 SHOWING THAT THE 2ND
PETITIONER WAS BROUGHT BY THE OFFICIALS
OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT
ANNEXURE 3 THE TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE FIR DATED
21.08.2025 IN CRIME NO. 1267 OF 2025
ANNEXURE 4 THE TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE INTERIM
ORDER DATED 12.09.2025
ANNEXURE 5 THE TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE ORDER
DATED 08.10.2025 IN B.A.NO. 10995 OF
ANNEXURE 6 THE TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE ORDER
DATED 09.10.2025 IN B.A.NO. 11230 OF
ANNEXURE 7 THE TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE ORDER
DATED 25.10.2025 IN CRL. M.C NO. 2987 OF
ANNEXURE 8 THE PHOTOCOPY COPY OF THE FIRST
INFORMATION REPORT DATED 22.08.2025 IN
CRIME NO. 1271/2025 OF VARKALA POLICE
STATION.
