[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Jaisal Muhammed K vs State Of Kerala on 19 January, 2026
Author: Kauser Edappagath
Bench: Kauser Edappagath
B.A.No. 14644 of 2025
..1..
2026:KER:4376
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
MONDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 29TH POUSHA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 14644 OF 2025
CRIME NO.358/2025 OF KODENCHERY POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2:
JAISAL MUHAMMED K
AGED 22 YEARS, S/O MOHAMMED K P,
KAREETHODUKAYIL , MANNILKADAVU,
AVILORA, P.O, KIZHAKKOTH,
KOZHIKODU, PIN - 673572
BY ADVS.
KUM.GAYATHRI MURALEEDHARAN
SMT.ARCHANA B.
SHRI.MUSAMIL HUVAIS C.K.
SMT.SRUTHILAKSHMI SHAJI
RESPONDENT/STATE:
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
19.01.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
B.A.No. 14644 of 2025
..2..
2026:KER:4376
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.2 in Crime
No.358/2025 of Kodenchery Police Station, Kozhikode District.
The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 111(1)
and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short,
'the BNS') and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act,
2000.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that while
conducting patrolling on 24.05.2025 at 3:30 p.m, the police
patrolling party found the accused No.1 in suspicious
circumstances along with 8 ATM cards and an amount of
₹ 25,000/-. On further probe, it was found that the ATM cards
belonged to accused Nos. 3 to 10. On verification of the
account number of the accused No.3 in Cyber Crime Portal, it
was realised that a complaint has been registered against her
..3..
2026:KER:4376
account in the State of Karnataka and also in the State of
Telangana. Similarly, on verification of the account details of
the accused No.4 in the Cyber Crime Portal, it was realised
that two complaints are received against accused Nos. 3 to 10
in the State of Maharashtra and one complaint each has been
received in the State of Telangana and Karnataka. Similarly,
two complaints are found filed against the account of the
accused No.7 in Andhra Pradesh, and one complaint is filed in
Haryana. As far as the accused No. 6 is concerned, two
complaints are pending in Telangana. It is also reported that
the accused Nos. 3, 5, 6 and 8 have withdrawn their amounts
from their bank accounts immediately on transfer of the
accounts to them and thereby committed the offences.
4. I have heard Smt.Gayathri Muraleedharan, 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
..4..
2026:KER:4376
above crime. 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 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 has been implicated based on the
statement of accused No.1 that ATM Cards were handed over
by the applicant. Accused No.1 was granted regular bail on his
production before the Magistrate. Accused Nos. 3 to 10 were
already granted anticipatory bail by the Sessions Court,
Kozhikode holding that the ingredients of Section 111(1) of
BNS are prima-facie not attracted against them. The learned
counsel for the applicant submitted that as against the
applicant also, the offence under Section 111(1) of BNS is not
attracted at all inasmuch as there is nothing on record to show
that more than one charge sheet has been filed before a
..5..
2026:KER:4376
competent court within the preceding period of ten years and
that such court has taken cognizance of the said offence
against the applicant or any other accused. In support of her
argument, the learned counsel placed reliance on the decision
of this Court in Muhammad Rasheed v. State of Kerala [2024
KLT OnLine 2089]. It was held that to attract an offence under
Section 111 (1) of the BNS it is imperative that a group of two
or more persons indulge in any continuing unlawful activity
prohibited by law, which is a cognizable offence punishable
with imprisonment of three years or more, undertaken by any
person, either singly or jointly, as a member of an organised
crime syndicate or on behalf of such syndicate in respect of
which more than one charge-sheets have been filed before a
competent Court within the preceding period of ten years and
that Court has taken cognizance of such offence. The
prosecution has no case that more than one charge-sheet has
been filed before a competent court against the applicant
within the preceding period of ten years. Insofar as Section
..6..
2026:KER:4376
318(4) of the BNS is concerned, there is no allegation of any
inducement on the part of the applicant. 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:-
(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
..7..
2026:KER:4376
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
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
..8..
2026:KER:4376
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. NO. 14644 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR REGISTERED ON
28.06.2025 IN CRIME NO: 0358/2025 OF
KODENCHERY POLICE STATION
ANNEXURE A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.07.2025
IN CRL.M.C. NO.1042/2025 OF COURT OF
SESSION , KOZHIKODE
ANNEXURE A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE INVITATION CARD DATED
NIL
ANNEXURE.A3(a) THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE
AUDITORIUM DATED 13.09.2025
ANNEXURE A4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS
HONOURABLE COURT DATED 13.08.2024 MUHAMMAD
RASHEED V. STATE OF KERALA 2024 3 CRIMES (HC)
393, 2024 (5) KHC 417
