[Cites 9, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Ajmal vs State Of Kerala on 9 February, 2026
Author: Kauser Edappagath
Bench: Kauser Edappagath
2026:KER:11365
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 20TH MAGHA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 487 OF 2026
CRIME NO.1236/2025 OF CHALAKKUDY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 03.01.2026 IN CRMP NO.7957 OF 2025
OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT -IV, THRISSUR / III
ADDITIONAL MACT/RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THRISSUR
PETITIONER:
AJMAL,
AGED 35 YEARS
SON OF IBRAHIM, ANAKKOTTIL HOUSE, PALLIVALAVU DESOM,
KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR, PIN - 680681
BY ADVS.
SRI.JITHIN BABU A
SHRI.ARUN SAMUEL
SHRI.ANOOD JALAL K.J.
SMT.DONA MATHEW
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
SRI.K.A. NOUSHAD, SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A. No.487 of 2026
-2-
2026:KER:11365
ORDER
This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS), seeking
regular bail.
2. The applicant is the accused No.3 in Crime
No.1236/2025 of Chalakudy Police Station, Thrissur District.
The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 22(c), 28
and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,
1985.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 14.11.2025
at 13.50 hours, accused Nos.1 and 2 imported 56.120 grams of
MDMA from Bangalore as per the instruction of accused No.6.
The applicant along with accused Nos.4 and 6 were found in a
car near to KSRTC compound at Chalakkudy and thereby
committed the offences.
4. I have heard Sri.Jithin Babu A., the learned counsel
for the applicant and Sri. K.A.Noushad, the learned Senior
Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.
5. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that
the applicant has been in custody since 14.11.2025 and the
2026:KER:11365
grounds of arrest were not communicated in accordance with
law at the time of his arrest. The learned Senior Public
Prosecutor on the other hand opposed the bail application and
submitted that the grounds of arrest were duly communicated.
6. Though prima facie there are materials on record to
connect the applicant with the crime, since the applicant has
raised a question of absence of communication of the grounds
of his arrest, let me consider the same.
7. It is now well settled that the requirement of
informing a person of the grounds for arrest is a mandatory
requirement of Art.22(1) of the Constitution and Section 47 of
BNSS and absence of the same would render the arrest illegal
(See. Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India and Others [(2024) 7
SCC 576], Prabir Purkayastha v. State (NCT of Delhi)
[(2024) 8 SCC 254], Vihaan Kumar v. State of Haryana and
Others (2025 SCC OnLine SC 269] and Mihir Rajesh Shah v.
State of Maharashtra and Another (2025 SCC OnLine SC
2356).
8. In the instant case, the perusal of the records show
that the grounds of arrest have been communicated to the
2026:KER:11365
arrestee, but they were not communicated to the near relatives
in writing. The Supreme Court in Kasireddy Upender Reddy
v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2025 SCC OnLine SC 1228) has
held that the grounds of arrest should not only be provided to
the arrestee but also to his family members and relatives so
that necessary arrangements are made to secure the release of
the person arrested at the earliest possible opportunity so as to
make the mandate of Art.22(1) meaningful and effective, failing
which, such arrest would be rendered illegal. A learned Single
Judge of this Court in Alvin Riby v. State of Kerala (2025
KER 67079) following Kasireddy Upender Reddy (supra) held
that failure to communicate the grounds of arrest to the near
relatives renders the arrest illegal.The record would show that
the intimation to the relative was given over phone only and not
in writing. The arrest in this case is after the judgment in
Mihir Rajesh Shah (supra). Inasmuch as the grounds of arrest
were not communicated to the relatives of the applicant in
writing, the arrest stands vitiated and he is entitled to be
released on bail.
In the result, the application is allowed on the following
2026:KER:11365
conditions: -
(i) The applicant shall be released on bail on executing a
bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two
solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the
jurisdictional Magistrate/Court.
(ii) The applicant shall fully co-operate with the
investigation.
(iii) The applicant shall appear before the investigating
officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until
further orders. He shall also appear before the investigating
officer as and when required.
(iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence of a like
nature while on bail.
(v) The applicant shall not attempt to contact any of the
prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or
in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence
any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.
(vi) The applicant shall not leave the State of Kerala
without the permission of the trial Court.
(vii) The application, if any, for deletion/modification of the
2026:KER:11365
bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of violating
the bail conditions shall be filed at the jurisdictional court.
Sd/-
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
JUDGE
SKP
2026:KER:11365
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. NO. 487 OF 2026
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:
Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.
1236/2025 OF CHALAKUDY POLICE STATION,
THRISSUR.
Annexure 2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03/01/2026
IN CRL. M.P. NO. 7957/2025 BY IV ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT COURT, THRISSUR.
Annexure 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REMAND REPORT ALONG WITH
OTHER DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE
INVESTIGATION OFFICER IN CONNECTION WITH
CRIME NO. 1236/2025 OF CHALAKUDY POLICE
STATION, THRISSUR.
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL
TRUE COPY
P.A. TO JUDGE
