Muhammad Suhail vs State Of Kerala
2026 Latest Caselaw 1820 Ker

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1820 Ker
Judgement Date : 19 February, 2026

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Muhammad Suhail vs State Of Kerala on 19 February, 2026

Author: Kauser Edappagath

Bench: Kauser Edappagath

B.A.No. 811 of 2026

                                 ..1..




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

         THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

 THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 30TH MAGHA, 1947

                      BAIL APPL. NO. 811 OF 2026

    CRIME NO.423/2024 OF PARIYARAM MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE
                       STATION, KANNUR
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

           MUHAMMAD SUHAIL,
           AGED 26 YEARS, S/O. SUNIL,
           PANACKAL HOUSE, LAJANATH WARD,
           ALAPPUZHA HEAD.P.O,
           ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688001

           BY ADVS.
           SHRI.VIDHU M.UNNITHAN
           SHRI.AROMALUNNI M.S.
           SHRI.BINU BABUKUTTAN
           SHRI.RATHEESH C.
           SHRI.HARI SANKAR V.
           SMT.NIMA MERIYAM KOSHY

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/
STATE AND COMPLAINANT:

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

           SRI.M.C. ASHI, SR. PP

     THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
19.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 B.A.No. 811 of 2026

                                 ..2..




                            ORDER

This application is filed under Section 482 of the

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS),

seeking pre-arrest bail.

2. The applicant is the accused No.34 in Crime

No.423/2024 of Pariyaram Medical College Police Station,

Kannur District. The offences alleged are punishable under

Section 420 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860

and Section 66D of the Information Technology (Amendment)

Act, 2008.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the accused

together in furtherance of their common intention of

cheating, had induced the de facto complainant to deposit an

amount of Rs.1,00,76,000/- in different accounts during the

period 29.05.2024 to 02.07.2024. It is alleged that the

accused No.1 introduced himself as one Mr.Udayyan Kejriwal,

team leader of ARES Management Corporation, a share

..3..

trading concern based on America and offered higher profit in

Online trading by sending message through Whatsapp and

made him a member of the group. Then, during the above

period, because of the representation of the accused, the de

facto complainant deposited Rs.1,00,76,000/-. They have

neither paid the profit nor returned the amount deposited.

The allegation against the applicant is that the accused No.6

has provided the account details of the accused Nos.3 and 4

to the applicant for online trading and it was handled by the

applicant and his brother and thereby committed the

offences.

4. I have heard Sri.Vidhu M.Unnithan, the learned

counsel for the applicant and Sri.M.C.Ashi, the learned Senior

Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted

that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated

in the above crime. The counsel further submitted that no

materials are on record to connect the applicant with the

..4..

alleged crime; hence, he is entitled to bail. The learned

Senior Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that

the alleged incident occurred as part of the applicant's

intentional criminal acts, and if he is released on bail at this

stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.

6. The applicant was subsequently arrayed as an

accused. Admittedly, no amount has been received by him.

He has no direct contact with the defacto complainant also.

The only allegation against him is that the accused No.6

provided the account details of accused Nos.3 and 4 to the

applicant for online trading and it was handled by him and his

brother. The applicant has no criminal antecedents.

Considering the allegations made against the applicant, his

custodial interrogation seems unnecessary. For these

reasons, I find this to be an appropriate case to grant pre-

arrest bail to the applicant.

In the result, the application is allowed on the following

conditions:-

..5..

(i) The applicant shall be released on bail in the event

of his arrest 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 arresting officer/investigating officer,

as the case may be.

(ii) The applicant shall fully cooperate with the

investigation, including subjecting himself to the deemed

police custody for discovery, if any, as and when demanded.

(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

..6..

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

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 APA

..7..

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. NO. 811 OF 2026

PETITIONER ANNEXURES