Kerala High Court Grants Bail To Two Accused Booked For 2021 Murder Of CPI(M) Leader Sandeep Kumar

They are accused of the offences under Sections 120B, 143, 147, 148, 302, 307, 452, 506(ii), 294(b), 149 and 212 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 20 r/w Section 27 of the Arms Act. The same is now pending before the Additional Sessions Court, Pathanamthitta.

The second accused, Pramod was arrested on December 3, 2021. Thereafter, the High Court had granted him bail on stringent conditions, almost three years later, noting the delay in trial and the prolonged custody.

Subsequently, another case was registered against him in 2025 and he was in judicial custody on 29.07.2025. Since he was absent and his lawyer failed to represent him, the Additional Sessions cancelled the bail granted to him in the present case. Thereupon, he has come before the High Court.

His counsel argued that there was no reason to cancel his bail in the present crime since he was in judicial custody related to another crime, for which he obtained bail later. He further submitted that being in custody has incapacitated him from conducting his defence effectively. The public prosecutor opposed the bail stating that the accused is delaying trial and that he may abscond.

Considering the submission, the Court observed:

“This is a case where the petitioner comes before the Constitutional Court and makes a submission that he is incapacitated to take a valuable and creative defence in a murder trial. His specific contention is that being an under-trial prisoner, he will be handicapped in getting a fair trial… The apprehension of the prosecution that the petitioner may abscond is not supported by any concrete materials. Therefore, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail subject to stringent conditions.”

The Court also considered the bail plea of the first accused in the case, Jishnu Reghu. He was arrested and later granted bail on 14.10.2024. Thereafter, the Sessions Court had cancelled his bail on 10.06.2025 for being absent.

Later, he was arrested on 03.07.2025. Though he came before the Sessions Court and the High Court, his bail applications were dismissed. The High Court had given a direction to the Sessions Judge to dispose of the matter expeditiously. Thereafter, again, he had approached the High Court seeking bail but the same was dismissed stating that he failed to establish that there was any change in circumstance.

This petitioner's counsel also argued that his detention would prevent him from defending his case. He also argued that the 1^st accused is entitled to be granted bail applying the principle of parity.

Accepting the contention, the Court observed:

“The petitioner/accused No.1 is entitled to the benefit granted to accused No.2. This is a change in the circumstance that existed at the time of disposal of the earlier applications. Therefore, the petitioner/accused No.2 is entitled to regular bail on stringent conditions.”

The Court, thus, allowed the two bail pleas and released the petitioners on bail, imposing stringent conditions. It further directed the Additional Sessions Court to dispose of the trial as expeditiously as possible, within a period of six months.

Case No: Bail Appl. No. 13033 of 2025 and Bail Appl. No. 13369 of 2025

Case Title: Pramod Prasannan v. State of Kerala and Jishnu Reghu v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 728

Counsel for the petitioners: Renjith B.Marar, Lakshmi N. Kaimal, P. Rajkumar, Keshavraj Nair, Biju Vigneswar, Arun Poomulli, Meera Joppan, Abhiram S., Gaadha Suresh, T.K. Babu, Viswanath Jayan, Akhila Radhakrishnan, Akshay Shibu – for Pramod Prasannan; C.Rajendran – Jishnu Reghu

Counsel for the respondent: C.K. Suresh – Sr. Public Prosecutor

Click to Read/Download Judgment