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 applicant is the accused No.6 in Crime No.782/2026 of Koyilandy Police Station, Kozhikode District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 118(2), 126(2), and 115(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The prosecution case, in short, is that on 25.08.2026 at about 5.00 p.m., the accused No.1 wrongfully restrained and assaulted Mr. Manojan who is the elder brother of the de facto complainant's father, and that the said Manojan sustained an injury on his head by the use of a stone perpetrated by the accused No.1. The accused Nos. 2 to 8 also assaulted the de facto complainant and his friends when they tried to resist the attack. Thus, the applicant has committed the offences.
I have heard Sri. K.S. Arun Kumar, 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 against the applicant. He has been named in the FIR. Moreover, the injured has sustained serious injury on his skull.
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.