[Cites 8, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Hyder Ali vs State Of Kerala on 27 January, 2026
Author: Kauser Edappagath
Bench: Kauser Edappagath
2026:KER:6350
BAIL APPL. NO. 14612 OF 2025 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 7TH MAGHA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 14612 OF 2025
CRIME NO.190/2025 OF KARIPUR POLICE STATION, Malappuram
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 16.09.2025 IN Bail Appl.
NO.10004 OF 2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.4:
HYDER ALI
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O.KUNHAYAMU, PULLAKANIKKAL HOUSE, MANALAYA,
ANAMANGAD, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 679357.
BY ADV SRI.VIVEK VENUGOPAL
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT-STATE:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN - 682031.
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.M.C.ASHI, SR. PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.01.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:6350
BAIL APPL. NO. 14612 OF 2025 2
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.4 in Crime No.190/2025
of Karippur Police Station, Malappuram District. The offences alleged
are punishable under Section 22(c) read with Section 29 of the
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short
'the NDPS' Act').
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the detecting
officer seized 1598.47 grams of MDMA from the dining hall of the
house with door No.27/267 of Kondotty Municipality on 10.03.2025
at about 3 PM. It is further alleged that the said house was in the
possession and occupation of accused No.1, though he was lodged
as remanded prisoner in Mattancherry prison. It is also alleged that
accused Nos.2, 3 and 4 provided financial assistance to accused
No.1 for purchasing the said contraband from a foreign country and
to bring the same to India for retail sale and thus alleged to have
committed the aforesaid offences.
4. I have heard Sri.Vivek Venugopal, the learned
2026:KER:6350
BAIL APPL. NO. 14612 OF 2025 3
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 has been in custody since 16.05.2025 and the
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).
2026:KER:6350
BAIL APPL. NO. 14612 OF 2025 4
8. In the instant case, the perusal of the records show
that the grounds of arrest have been communicated to the arrestee,
but they were not communicated to the near relatives. 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: -
(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
2026:KER:6350
BAIL APPL. NO. 14612 OF 2025 5
Magistrate/Court.
(ii) The applicant shall not commit any offence of a like
nature while on bail.
(iii) 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.
(iv) The applicant shall not leave the State of Kerala
without the permission of the trial Court.
(v) The application, if any, for deletion/modification of the
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
DSV/27.01.2026
2026:KER:6350
BAIL APPL. NO. 14612 OF 2025 6
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. NO. 14612 OF 2025
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME
NO.190/2025 OF KARIPPUR POLICE STATION,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT DATED 10.03.2025
Annexure 2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED
04.07.2025 IN B.A.NO.6366/2025 PASSED BY
THIS HON'BLE COURT
Annexure 3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED
04.06.2025 IN CRL.MP.NO.655/2025 PASSED BY
THE SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST (POA) ACT &
NDPS ACT CASES, MANJERI
Annexure 4 ORDER DATED 16-09-2025 IN BAIL
APPL.10004/2025 ON HIGH COURT
Annexure 5 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED
06.12.2025 IN B.A.NO.12276/2025
