Kerala High Court Denies Pre-Arrest Bail To DYFI Leaders Accused Of Assaulting Police During Liquor Policy Protest
The Kerala High Court on Monday (July 27) denied pre-arrest bail to six DYFI leaders, who were booked for assaulting police officers during protest march against the State's liquor policy. [2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 404]
Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath found that the allegations against the applicants were very serious and that custodial interrogation is necessary for investigation, which is still in the preliminary stage.
The Court further added that there is a possibility of influencing the witnesses and interfering with the investigation.
The prosecution allegation was that on June 24, 2026 at about 10:00 am, the applicants along with 100 activists of the DYFI formed into an unlawful assembly and conducted a protest march from Pentamenaka to Kanayannur Taluk Office against the State government's liquor policy. It is alleged that they raised provocative slogans and obstructed vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
The prosecution further alleged that at around 11:45 am, when the police barricaded the protest procession near Maharaja's college, they overturned the barricades and attempted to force their way into the Taluk Office. Moreover, they assaulted the police officers in the rank of Inspector and Sub-Inspector, it is alleged. They also damaged police lathis and shield, and obstructed the official duty of the police.
The accused/applicants were booked under Sections 189(2) [Unlawful assembly], 191(2) [Rioting], 285 [Danger or obstruction in public way or line of navigation], 121(1) [Voluntarily causing hurt or grievous hurt to deter public servant from his duty] and 132 [Assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty] read with 190 [Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object] of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The other offences roped in include Section 6 of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Procession) Act, 2011 and Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984.
After hearing the parties, the Court was of the view that pre-arrest bail cannot be granted as a matter of course, especially when the allegations are serious.
“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. The police officers have sustained injuries in the incident,” the Court noted.
The Court thus felt it fit to dismiss the bail application.
Case No: Bail Appl. No. 3960 of 2026
Case Title: Shresha N. and Ors. v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 404
Counsel for the petitioners: K.S. Arun Kumar
Counsel for the respondents: Aneeda Beegum – Senior public prosecutor