AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS), seeking pre-arrest bail.
The applicants are the accused Nos. 1 to 3 in Crime No.659/2026 of Kattakkada Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 126(2), 115(2) and 118(1) read with Section 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The prosecution case, in short, is that on 26.08.2026 at about 9.00 p.m., while the defacto complainant was watching an Onam programme along with his friend Mahavishnu, the applicant No.1 allegedly attempted to assault Mahavishnu and the defacto complainant intervened to prevent the said assault. When the defacto complainant attempted to prevent the applicant No.1 from assaulting his friend, the applicant No.1 took a stone and hit the defacto complainant on his back and the defacto complainant fell down on the ground, whereupon the applicants and the accused Nos. 4 to 13 allegedly kicked him while he was lying on the ground. Further, when the defacto complainant attempted to extricate himself from the alleged assault and tried to run away, the applicant No.1 took a knife, caused an injury to his right hand and thereby committed the offences.
I have heard Sri. Mithun Pavanan, the learned counsel for the applicants and Smt. Aneeda Beegum, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.
The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicants with the alleged crime; hence, they are entitled to bail. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as part of the applicants' intentional criminal acts, and if they are 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 applicants is very serious in nature, and it prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on their part. Specific overt act has been attributed against the applicants. All the applicants used weapon. The defacto complainant sustained injury in the incident.
The investigation is in a preliminary stage. The custodial interrogation of the applicants is necessary for the investigation. As rightly argued by the learned Senior Public Prosecutor, the possibility of the applicants influencing the witnesses and interfering with the investigation cannot be ruled out if they are 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.