Sunday, 10, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Sagar S K vs State Of Kerala
2026 Latest Caselaw 1738 Ker

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1738 Ker
Judgement Date : 18 February, 2026

[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Sagar S K vs State Of Kerala on 18 February, 2026

Author: Kauser Edappagath
Bench: Kauser Edappagath
                                                             2026:KER:14488


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                 PRESENT

            THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

     WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026/29TH MAGHA, 1947

                      BAIL APPL. NO. 667 OF 2026

   CRIME NO.846/2025 OF KUNNATHUNADU POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

            SAGAR S K
            AGED 20 YEARS, SON OF AJITH SHEIKH,
            SITA NAGAR, SAGARAPARA, MURSHIDABAD, WEST BENGAL,
            PIN - 742306

            BY ADVS.
            SHRI.ADITH KRISHNAN.U.
            SHRI.DHANANJAY DEEPAK




RESPONDENTS/STATE:

    1       STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
            ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031

    2       STATION HOUSE OFFICER
            KUNNATHNADU POLICE STATION, THEKKADY ROAD,
            KUNNATHANADU, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683562

            BY ADV.
            SRI.K.A. NOUSHAD, SR. PP


     THIS   BAIL   APPLICATION   HAVING    COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
18.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 BAIL APPL. NO. 667 OF 2026
                                       2
                                                                 2026:KER:14488




                                   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 sole accused in Crime

No.846/2025 of Kunnathunadu Police Station, Ernakulam

District. The offence alleged is punishable under Section

20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic

Substances Act, 1985 ('the Act' for short).

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that, on

18.07.2025 at 12:30 hours, the police have seized 1.040

Kgs of Hashish Oil from the possession of the applicant

near Kizhakkambalam bus stand. Thus, the applicant has

committed the above offence.

4. I have heard Sri. Adith Krishnan.U, 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

18.07.2025 and the grounds of arrest were not BAIL APPL. NO. 667 OF 2026

2026:KER:14488

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 were properly BAIL APPL. NO. 667 OF 2026

2026:KER:14488

communicated to the arrestee, but they were not properly

communicated to the near relatives. The intimation does

not contain the grounds of arrest as well as the quantity of

the contraband seized. 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. Inasmuch as the

grounds of arrest were not communicated to the relatives

of the applicant, the arrest stands vitiated and he is

entitled to be released on bail.

In the result, the application is allowed on the

following conditions: -

BAIL APPL. NO. 667 OF 2026

2026:KER:14488

(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 bail conditions or cancellation BAIL APPL. NO. 667 OF 2026

2026:KER:14488

of bail on the grounds of violating the bail conditions shall

be filed at the jurisdictional court.

Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE ARK BAIL APPL. NO. 667 OF 2026

2026:KER:14488

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. NO. 667 OF 2026

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR) DATED 18.07.2025

ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.MC NO:

2800/2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT AT ERNAKULAM DATED 17.10.2025

ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.MC NO:

3592/2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT AT ERNAKULAM DATED 05.12.2025

ANNEXURE A4 TRUE COPY OF THE SECTION 50 (1) OF THE NDPS ACT, 1985 GIVEN TO THE PETITIONER DATED 18.07.2025

ANNEXURE A5 TRUE TRUE COPY OF THE ARREST MEMO DATED 18.07.2025

ANNEXURE A6 TRUE COPY OF THE ARREST INTIMATION DATED 19.07.2025

ANNEXURE A7 TRUE COPY OF THE REMAND REPORT DATED 19.07.2025

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter