Akshay vs State Of Kerala & Anr.

This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS), seeking pre-arrest bail.

The applicant is the accused No.3 in Crime No.360/2026 of Hill Palace Police Station, Ernakulam District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 127(2) and 137 r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The prosecution case, in short, is that the accused persons had enmity towards the defacto complainant for betraying them to the Excise Department. Due to the grudge, on 13.06.2026 at about 10.45 p.m., in front of Thiruvankulam Tourist Home (TTH) Bar, the accused persons with an intention to cause bodily injury to the defacto complainant, the accused No.1 caught the neck of the defacto complainant and beat him. The accused No.1 with a weapon beat the de-facto complainant on his left cheek. The accused Nos. 1 to 5 forcibly abducted the defacto complainant in a Hyundai i10 car and he was taken to the residence of the accused No.2. The defacto complainant was taken to the terrace of the residence of the accused No.2 where he was beaten and criminally intimidated. Thus, the applicant committed the aforementioned offences.

I have heard Sri.B.Deepak, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.V.Vinay, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

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 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.

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. Specific overt act has been attributed to the applicant. The applicant has criminal antecedents. The defacto complainant sustained injuries in the incident.

The investigation is in a preliminary stage. The custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary for the investigation. As rightly argued by the learned Senior 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.