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.4 in Crime No.356/2026 of Marayamuttam Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District. The offence alleged is punishable under Section 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The prosecution case, in short, is that on 03.06.2026 between 08.30 p.m. to 9.00 p.m., the accused with a common intention, committed theft of the Scorpio car bearing registration No. KL 04 R 6006 belonging to the son of defacto-complainant parked at the vacant place on the side of Tannikuzhi-Mooverikkara public road at the place named Varattayam in Narani Desom of Kunnathukal Village causing loss to the tune of Rs.1,25,000/- and thereby committed the offence.
I have heard Smt.Nikita Nair C.S., 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. The applicant in the bail application admits that the accused No.3 contacted him, enquiring whether he knew any scrap dealers operating in Tamil Nadu and he passed on the contact phone number of a scrap agent in Tamil Nadu. The vehicle has not been recovered. Hence, it is necessary to interrogate the applicant to know about the details of the scrap dealer.
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.