BA No.3650 of 2025 1 2025:KER:27215 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 7TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 3650 OF 2025 CRIME NO.205/2025 OF Harippad Police Station, Alappuzha PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.1 & 3: 1 ABHIJITH RAJ AGED 22 YEARS S/O. SOMARAJAN, VELIYATH HOUSE, POTHAPPALLY SOUTH KUMARAPURAM VILLAGE, KARTHIKAPPALLY TALUK, ALAPPUZHA., PIN - 690548 2 AMAL @ APPUS AGED 25 YEARS S/O ASOKAN, PALAMOOTTIL HOUSE POTHAPPALLY NORTH, KUMARAPURAM,ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690548 BY ADVS. S.S.ARAVIND TINU ABRAHAM RESPONDENT ( S )/COMPLAINANT : STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031 BY ADV.: SR PP - NOUSHAD K A THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BA No.3650 of 2025 2 2025:KER:27215 P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- BA No.3650 of 2025 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of March, 2025 O R D E R This Bail Application is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. 2. The petitioners are accused in Crime No.205/2025 of Harippad Police Station, Alappuzha. The above case is registered against the petitioners alleging offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 304(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. 3. The prosecution case is that, due to the animosity of the petitioners towards the friends of the defacto complainant and in furtherance of their common intention to cause bodily hurt to them, on BA No.3650 of 2025 3 2025:KER:27215 21/02/2025 at 10.15 pm, while the defacto complainant and his friends were returning from Kavarattu temple, the 1st petitioner beat on the cheek of one Sooraj with hands, kicked on the abdomen of one Jithu who was also assaulted by the 3rd accused in the crime. On seeing this when the defacto complainant took his Apple I phone to call for help, the petitioners got angry and the 2nd petitioner wrongly restrained him after snatching his mobile phone and beat on his cheek. Hence, it is alleged that the accused committed the offence. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. When this bail application came up for consideration on 21.03.2025, this Court passed the following order: “The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on 24.03.2025. The BA No.3650 of 2025 4 2025:KER:27215 Investigating Officer can interrogate the petitioners and submit a report before this Court whether further custodial interrogation is necessary. Post on 28.03.2025. The petitioners shall not be arrested till then.” 6. Today, when the matter came up for consideration, the Public Prosecutor submitted that, the petitioners appeared before the Investigating Officer and their further custodial interrogation is not necessary. If that be the case, the petitioners can be directed to appear before the Investigating Officer once again to complete the procedure. If arrest is recorded, there can be a direction to release the petitioner on bail. Therefore, this bail application is allowed with the following conditions: 1. The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within two weeks from BA No.3650 of 2025 5 2025:KER:27215 today and shall undergo interrogation. 2. After interrogation, if the Investigating Officer propose to arrest the petitioners, they shall be released on bail on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer concerned. 3. The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required. The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation and shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police BA No.3650 of 2025 6 2025:KER:27215 officer. 4. Petitioners shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court. 5. Petitioners shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected. 6. The observations and findings in this order is only for the purpose of deciding this bail application. The principle laid down by this Court in Anzar Azeez v. State of Kerala [2025 SCC OnLine KER 1260] is applicable in this case also. 7. Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the investigating officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the BA No.3650 of 2025 7 2025:KER:27215 information, if any, given by the petitioners even while the petitioners are on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another [2020 (1) KHC 663]. 8. If any of the above conditions are violated by the petitioners, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance to law, even though this bail is granted by this Court. The prosecution and the victim are at liberty to approach the jurisdictional Court to cancel the bail, if any of the above conditions are violated. Sd/- P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN nvj JUDGE