Kerala High Court
Renin A R vs Union Of India on 25 September, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
2025:KER:71633
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 3RD ASWINA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 10497 OF 2025
CRIME NO.18/2023 OF COMMISSIONARATE OF CUSTOMS
PREVENTIVE, ERNAKULAM AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED
13.11.2024 IN BAIL APPL. NO.8175 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF
KERALA.
PETITIONER:
RENIN A R.,
AGED 31 YEARS,
S/O RAVEENDRAN A P ANATT HOUSE,
NAYARAMBALAM P O., ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 509.
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.RAJEEV
SRI.V.VINAY
SRI.M.S.ANEER
SHRI.SARATH K.P.
SHRI.K.S.KIRAN KRISHNAN
SMT.DIPA V.
SHRI.AKASH CHERIAN THOMAS
SHRI.AZAD SUNIL
SRI.RAAJESH S.SUBRAHMANIAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 UNION OF INDIA.,
DEPARTMENT OF CUSTOMS THROUGH STANDING COUSEL,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.,
PIN - 682 031.
Bail Appl. No.10497 of 2025
2025:KER:71633
-2-
2 SUPERINTENDENT OF CUSTOMS,
SPECIAL INTELLIGENCE & INVESTIGATION
BRANCH(SIIB) ,CUSTOMS HOUSE COCHIN,
PIN - 682 001.
BY ADV SHRI.SALISH ARAVINDAKSHAN
SMT. SREEJA V., PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.09.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl. No.10497 of 2025
2025:KER:71633
-3-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS., J
--------------------------------------
Bail Appl. No.10497 of 2025
------------------------------------
Dated this the 25th 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 second accused in Crime No.18 of 2023 of
the Commissionarate of Customs Preventive, Ernakulam registered for
the offences punishable under sections 22(c), 23(c), 27A and 29 r/w
Section 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,
1985 (for short 'NDPS Act').
3. According to the prosecution, on 31.08.2023, accused was
found to be in possession of 1.39 grams (121 Nos.) of Lysergic Acid
Diethylamide (LSD) and thereby committed the offences alleged.
Petitioner was arrested on 09.09.2023, and he has been in custody since
then.
4. Sri.S Rajeev., the learned counsel for the petitioner,
submitted that the entire prosecution allegations are false, and the
petitioner has no involvement in the crime. It was also submitted that
the third accused was granted bail as early as on 11.07.2024, while the
first accused has been granted bail as per Annexure-III order on
2025:KER:71633
19.04.2025 and therefore, the principle of parity ought to be applied to
grant him bail. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner
stands on a lesser degree of criminality in respect of the first accused,
who was a person from whose possession the contraband was seized.
5. Sri.Salish Aravindakshan., the learned counsel for the
respondent, on the other hand, submitted that the allegations are
serious and that petitioner ought not to be released on bail. Though it
was conceded that accused 1 and 3 have already been released on bail,
since the allegations against each of the accused are different, it was
submitted that parity ought not to be granted.
6. Smt.Sreeja V., the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the
bail application and submitted that the petitioner ought not to be
released on bail.
7. I have considered the rival submissions.
8. In the decision in Seyid Nabeel Ahammed v. Union of
India [2025 KHC Online 801], a Division Bench of this Court has
observed as follows;
"30. We are of the considered view that, as a general rule, an
accused is entitlec to bail if a co - accused, who is similarly placed as that
of the accused to whom bail has already been granted. The principle of
parity ordinarily favours the grant of bail, in such circumstances. Parity is
a rule of prudence commonly accepted and practiced in Indian Courts.
However, this rule is subject to certain exceptions. If it is shown that the
earlier grant of bail to the co - accused was based on erroneous
considerations or a misconception of facts, or ignorance of the provisions
of a statute or rule, the denial of bail to the other accused on the ground of
parity may be legally justified."
2025:KER:71633
9. It is thus evident that parity is a rule of prudence commonly
accepted and practised in Indian Courts.
10. On a perusal of Annexure-II order, this Court notices that
the Sessions Court had granted bail to the first accused after
elaborately considering various aspects of the matter and also taking
note of the period of custody already undergone by the accused and the
practical impossibility of completing trial in a time bound manner.
Those reasonings cannot be said to be misplaced or based on
misconception of facts. In fact, those reasons squarely apply to the
case of the petitioner also. Moreover, the allegations against the
petitioner is that he had financed the procurement of the contraband.
11. Though the allegations cannot be said to be of a lesser
degree than the other accused, since the first accused and third accused
have already been granted bail, I am of the view that petitioner is
entitled to be granted parity.
In the result, this application is allowed on the following
conditions:-
(a) Petitioner 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 to the satisfaction of
the court having jurisdiction.
(b) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as
and when required.
2025:KER:71633
(c) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the
witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence.
(d) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he
is on bail.
(e) Petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala 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
ADS
2025:KER:71633
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 10497/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure I ORDER DATED 13-11-2024 IN BAIL
APPL.8175/2024 ON HIGH COURT.
Annexure II THE TRUE COPY OF THE BAIL APPLICATION
WITHDRAWN FROM THE HON'BLE APEX COURT,
DATED 14.07.2025.
Annexure III COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL MP NO 1600/2024
IN SC NO 323/2024 DATED 19.04.2025 BY THE
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE.
Annexure IV A COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.07.2025 IN
CRL MP NO 3128/2025 IN SC NO. 323/2024.
