[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Muhammed Ajmal Kiliyamannil vs State Of Kerala on 23 February, 2026
Author: Kauser Edappagath
Bench: Kauser Edappagath
B.A.No.14520/2025
1
2026:KER:16149
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
MONDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 4TH PHALGUNA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 14520 OF 2025
CRIME NO.8/2024 OF CYBER CRIME POLICE
STATION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RURAL, Thiruvananthapuram
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 2.12.2025 IN CRMC NO.3509 OF
2025 OF SESSIONS COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3:
MUHAMMED AJMAL KILIYAMANNIL, AGED 32 YEARS
S/O MUHAMMED MUSTAFA KILIYAMANNIL HOUSE,
CHEMMANKADAVU, KODUR P.O, KURUVA, MALAPPURAM,
KERALA, PIN - 676504
BY ADVS. SHRI.HASHMI V.Z.
SHRI.ABHILASH N.
SMT.TINCY MARIA SCARIA
SHRI.GOUTHAM V.Z.
SHRI.ADARSH JOHNSON
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT
OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 INSPECTOR OF POLICE
CYBER POLICE STATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RURAL,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT
OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
SMT SREEJA V (SR PP)
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.14520/2025
2
2026:KER:16149
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.3 in Crime
No.8/2024 of Cyber Crime Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram
District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 406
and 420 of the IPC and Section 66D of the Information
Technology Act, 2000.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the
applicant with intention to obtain wrongful gain and to cause
wrongful loss to the friend of the defacto complainant, made him
believe that if he joins the online trading business, he would get
profit and during the period from 22.12.2023 to 27.2.2024,
obtained a total sum of ₹50,61,000/- by way of six transactions
through the bank account of the friend of the defacto
complainant maintained in Federal Bank, Chathannoor Branch.
Thereafter, the applicant neither gave profit nor returned the
money to the friend of the defacto complainant and thereby
committed the offences.
4. I have heard Sri. Hashmi V.Z., the learned
2026:KER:16149
counsel for the applicant and Smt. Sreeja V., 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 present case. The counsel further submitted that no
materials are on record to connect the applicant with the alleged
crime; hence, he is entitled to bail. The learned 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 law regarding the grant or refusal of pre-
arrest bail is well settled. Pre-arrest bail cannot be granted as a
matter of course. The power under Section 482 of BNSS could
be exercised only when a special case is made out, that too,
recording reasons thereof. Perusal of the case diary reveals that
the accusation made against the applicant is very serious in
nature, and it prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on
his part. In the investigation conducted so far, the involvement
of the applicant is clearly revealed.
The investigation is in a preliminary stage. The custodial
interrogation of the applicant is necessary for the investigation.
2026:KER:16149
As rightly argued by the learned Public Prosecutor, the possibility
of the applicant influencing the witnesses and interfering with the
investigation cannot be ruled out if he is released on bail.
Considering the gravity of the offence and stage of the
investigation, I am of the view that this is not a fit case where
the extraordinary jurisdiction vested with this Court under
Section 482 of BNSS could be invoked. The bail application is,
accordingly, dismissed.
Sd/-
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
JUDGE
kp
2026:KER:16149
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. NO. 14520 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.
8/2024 OF THE CYBER POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RURAL
Annexure 2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REMAND APPLICATION
OF THE 1ST ACCUSED IN THE SAID CRIME NO.
8/2024 DATED 13.09.2025 ON THE FILES OF
LEARNED JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE
COURT - II AT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Annexure 3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REMAND APPLICATION
OF THE 2ND ACCUSED IN THE SAID CRIME NO.
8/2024 DATED 27.09.2025 ON THE FILES OF
LEARNED JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE
COURT - II AT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Annexure 4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
02.12.2025 IN CRL. M. C. NO. 3509/2025
ON THE FILES OF THE COURT OF SESSION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Annexure 5 THE TREATMENT RECORDS OF THE WIFE OF THE
PETITIONER
Annexure 6 TRUE COPY OF THE EXPORTED WHATSAPP CHAT
AND TRANSCRIPTION OF THE VOICE NOTES OF
THE WHATSAPP CONVERSATION BETWEEN THE
PETITIONER AND SECOND ACCUSED.
Annexure 7 TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN CRL. M.C. NO. 2809
OF 2025 BY THE 2ND ADDITIONAL SESSIONS
COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED
29.09.2025.
Annexure 8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL. M.C. NO.
2983/2025 BY THE 2ND ADDITIONAL SESSIONS
COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED
21.10.2025.
