Kerala High Court
Abdul Salam Hussain vs State Of Kerala on 26 September, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
B.A.No.11803 of 2025 1
2025:KER:72165
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 4TH ASWINA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 11803 OF 2025
CRIME NO.1441/2023 OF ELAMAKKARA POLICE STATION, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 14.06.2024 IN Bail
Appl. NO.2486 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
ABDUL SALAM HUSSAIN
AGED 27 YEARS
S/O HUSSAIN, FATHIMA MANZIL HOUSE, BARA, UDUMA,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN - 671317
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.MOHAMED SABAH
SRI.LIBIN STANLEY
SMT.SAIPOOJA
SRI.SADIK ISMAYIL
SMT.R.GAYATHRI
SRI.M.MAHIN HAMZA
SHRI.ALWIN JOSEPH
SHRI.BENSON AMBROSE
RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
B.A.No.11803 of 2025 2
2025:KER:72165
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
ELAMAKKARA POLICE STATION,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682026
SRI. PRASANTH M P (PP)
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.09.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.11803 of 2025 3
2025:KER:72165
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
......................................................
B.A.No.11803 of 2025
...................................................
Dated this the 26th 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 sole accused in Crime No.1441 of 2023
of Elamakkara Police Station, Ernakulam, which is now pending as
S.C.No.278 of 2024 on the files of the First Additional Sessions
Court, Ernakulam, registered for the offence punishable under
Section 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances
Act, 1985 [for brevity, 'NDPS Act'].
3. According to the prosecution, on 05.09.2023 at about
6.50 p.m., accused was found in possession of 69.12 grams of
MDMA and thereby committed the offences alleged. Petitioner was
arrested on 05.09.2023 and he has been in custody since then.
4. Heard Adv.P.Mohamed Sabah, the learned Counsel for
the petitioner as well as Sri.Prasanth M.P., the learned Public
2025:KER:72165
Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner has been in custody since 05.09.2023. 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 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.
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 [AIR 2025 SC 1388], it has been held that the
2025:KER:72165
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 v. State of Kerala
[2025 KHC Online 706], this Court has also considered the
impact of the aforesaid principles 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 it is noticed that the
grounds for arrest have not been communicated to the petitioner
as there is no mention in the arrest memo regarding the same,
while, the arrest intimation given to the near relative of the
petitioner contains only a reference to the provisions of law. In
view of the failure to provide intimation of arrest or the grounds for
arrest to the relatives of the petitioner, I am satisfied that
petitioner has not been communicated with the grounds for arrest.
2025:KER:72165
In such circumstances, petitioner's arrest is vitiated.
11. Petitioner has been in custody from 05.09.2023
onwards. Since the grounds for arrest were not communicated to
the petitioner soon after the arrest, petitioner is entitled to be
released on bail.
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.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two
solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction
of the court having jurisdiction.
(b) Petitioner shall co-operate with the trial of the case.
(c) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence
the witnesses; nor shall he attempt to 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 jurisdictional Court.
2025:KER:72165
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
sp/26/09/2025
2025:KER:72165
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 11803/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT
IN CRIME NO. 392 OF 2025 OF CHEVAYOOR
POLICE STATION, KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT
