Kerala High Court
Muhammed Mishal vs State Of Kerala on 17 September, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
BAIL APPL. NO. 11288 OF 2025
1
2025:KER:69071
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 26TH BHADRA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 11288 OF 2025
CRIME NO.455/2025 OF ALUVA WEST POLICE STATION (ALANGAD),
ERNAKULAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 18.08.2025 IN BAIL APPL.
NO.9451 OF 2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1:
MUHAMMED MISHAL, AGED 28 YEARS
S/O. NAZER E.M., KALAPPURAKKAL VEEDU,
SANTHOSH LANE, CHOORNIKKARA (CT),
ERNAKULAM, KERALA., PIN - 683 101.
BY ADVS.
SHRI.BALAMURALI K.P.
SMT.HARIPRIYA.M
SHRI.MOHAMMED ASHIQ R.S.
SMT.KHADEEJATH RUKSANA K.
SHRI.RENIL IQUBAL K.
SHRI.SHAJI T.M.
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT :
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY, PIN - 682031
SMT. SREEJA V., PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.09.2025,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 11288 OF 2025
2
2025:KER:69071
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
......................................................
B.A. No.11288 of 2025
...................................................
Dated this the 17th day of September, 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.455/2025 of Aluva West Police
Station, Ernakulam; registered for the offences punishable under Sections
22(c), and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,
1985 (for short, NDPS).
3. The prosecution case is that, on 06.06.2025 accused Nos.1 and 2 were
found in possession of 53.9 grams of MDMA kept in the rental house of
the first accused, with the intention of sale, and thereby the accused
committed the offences alleged. Petitioner was arrested on 06.06.2025
and he has been in custody since then.
4. Heard Sri.Balamurali K.P., the learned counsel for the petitioner, as well
as Smt.Sreeja V., the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has
been in custody since 06.06.2025. It was submitted that the grounds for
arrest were not communicated to the petitioner or his relatives at the
time of his arrest.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted
BAIL APPL. NO. 11288 OF 2025
2025:KER:69071
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. It was further submitted that the investigation in the case has
not yet been completed and that the petitioner was arrested only on
06.06.2025.
7. 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.
8. 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 and
Another [2025 SCC Online SC 269], it has been held that the
requirement of informing a person of grounds for arrest is a mandatory
requirement of Article 22(1) and also that the said information must be
provided to the arrested person in such a manner that sufficient
knowledge of the basic facts constituting the grounds must be
communicated to the arrested person effectively in the language which
he understands.
9. In a recent decision in Shahina vs. State of Kerala [2025 KHC OnLine
706] this Court has also considered the impact of the aforesaid principles
BAIL APPL. NO. 11288 OF 2025
2025:KER:69071
in relation to offences alleged under the NDPS Act and held that the
grounds for arrest must be communicated.
10. On a perusal of the case diary, this Court notices that the
grounds for arrest have not been properly communicated as there is no
reference to the quantum of contraband or the applicable provisions of
law. Since the quantum is relevant in an offence under the NDPS Act,
failure to mention the quantum will vitiate the arrest. Further in the
intimation of arrest, given to the petitioner's father, there is no reference
to the grounds for arrest. In such circumstances, I am satisfied that the
grounds for arrest have not been communicated as contemplated by law.
However it is pointed out that the case is still under investigation and the
petitioner has been under custody from 06.06.2025.
11. Since the grounds for arrest have not been communicated to
the near relatives as contemplated by law, petitioner's arrest stands
vitiated. In such circumstances, his continued custody is legally
impermissible. Accordingly, the petitioner, being vitiated, he has to be
set at liberty forthwith.
In the result, the Superintendent of Sub Jail, Aluva; where the petitioner is
presently lodged, is directed to release him forthwith.
This application is disposed of as above.
sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
AMV/17/09/2025
BAIL APPL. NO. 11288 OF 2025
2025:KER:69071
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 11288/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE 1 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE F.I.R. IN CRIME NO.
CRIME NO. 455/2025 OF ALUVA WEST POLICE
STATION
ANNEXURE 2 THE TRUE COPY OF ONE OF THE ORDERS DATED
04/07/2025 IN B.A. NO.6366/2025
ANNEXURE 3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE BAIL ORDER DATED
18/08/2025 IN B.A. NO.9451/2025
