Kerala High Court
Ayed Muhammed vs State Of Kerala on 9 July, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
BAIL APPL. NO. 8100 OF 2025
1
2025:KER:51495
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 18TH ASHADHA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 8100 OF 2025
CRIME NO.1222/2025 OF Aluva Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMC NO.1718 OF 2025 OF DISTRICT
COURT & SESSIONS COURT/RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY,
ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/ ACCUSED :
AYED MUHAMMED
AGED 21 YEARS
S/O MUHAMMED IQBAL,
KADAPPILLY MOOLAYIL HOUSE
SOUTH KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 683104
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.RAJEEV
SRI.V.VINAY
SRI.M.S.ANEER
SHRI.SARATH K.P.
SHRI.ANILKUMAR C.R.
SHRI.K.S.KIRAN KRISHNAN
SMT.DIPA V.
SHRI.AKASH CHERIAN THOMAS
BAIL APPL. NO. 8100 OF 2025
2
2025:KER:51495
RESPONDENT/ STATE :
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
PIN - 682031
SMT. SREEJA V., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 8100 OF 2025
3
2025:KER:51495
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
-------------------------------------
B.A.No.8100 of 2025
------------------------------------
Dated this the 9th day of July, 2025
ORDER
This bail application is filed under section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS').
2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1222 of 2025 of Aluva Police Station, Ernakulam, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 296(b) and 132 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3(1) of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 (for short, 'PDPP' Act).
3. According to the prosecution, on 29/06/2025, at about 02:55 PM, the petitioner intercepted a KSRTC bus bearing registration number KL- 15-9542 and took out the key of the vehicle and threw it away and thereby caused a loss of Rs.10,400/- by way of cancellation of trip and thus committed the offences alleged.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.
BAIL APPL. NO. 8100 OF 2025 4 2025:KER:51495
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely arrayed as an accused and has no involvement in the alleged crime.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted that custodial interrogation is essential.
7. Petitioner is alleged to have abused the defacto complainant, who is the driver of a KSRTC bus and also threw away the key of the vehicle causing a loss of Rs.10,400/- by way of cancellation of the trip that was being undertaken.
8. Considering the nature of allegations, I am of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary especially since he is only 21 years in age. Further, even though a loss of Rs.10,400/- is stated to have been caused, the same is not relatable to any public property as defined under the PDPP Act. The loss caused to the Government on account of cancellation of a trip of the KSRTC bus is not a loss to public property as defined. Hence the said amount cannot be directed to be deposited as a bail condition.
9. In Sushila Aggarwal and Others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Another [(2020) 5 SCC 1], it was held that while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail or not, Courts ought to be generally BAIL APPL. NO. 8100 OF 2025 5 2025:KER:51495 guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case. Grant of anticipatory bail is a matter of discretion and the kind of conditions to be imposed or not to be imposed are all dependent on facts of each case, and subject to the discretion of the court.
10. Since, I am satisfied that petitioner is entitled to be released on pre-arrest bail, this application is allowed on the following conditions :-
(a) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on 18.07.2025 and shall subject himself to interrogation.
(b) If after interrogation, the Investigating Officer proposes to arrest the petitioner, then, he shall be released on bail on him executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum before the Investigating Officer.
(c) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required and shall also co-operate with the investigation.
(d) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence.
(e) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions or if any modification or deletion of the conditions are required, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider such applications, if any, and pass BAIL APPL. NO. 8100 OF 2025 6 2025:KER:51495 appropriate orders in accordance with law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE RKM BAIL APPL. NO. 8100 OF 2025 7 2025:KER:51495 APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 8100/2025 PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES :
Annexure I TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO 1222/2025 OF ALUVA POLICE STATION.
Annexure II ACCUSED COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE SESSIONS JUDGE ERNAKULAM IN CRL.M.C 1718/2025.