Prima Facie Opinion By Court At Stage Of Bail Application Not Binding On Investigation Or Trial: Kerala High Court

Justice P.V.Kunhikrishnan clarified that a 'prima facie opinion' by the bail court cannot be relied upon by the trial court when deciding the main case. The Court also emphasized that such a prima facie finding by bail court would not hinder investigating agency from proceeding with the investigation.

Court stated, “A finding of a prima facie case at the bail application stage is not binding to the trial court at the time of final disposal of that case. It is not binding to the Investigating Officer for further investigation to collect materials in addition to the materials collected already. Therefore, simply because a prima facie opinion is arrived at by the bail court while deciding a bail application, it is not binding on the trial court at the time of the final hearing, nor it is binding on the Investigating Officer, debarring the collection of further evidence.”

In this case, the Petitioner who was in judicial custody for allegedly committing offences punishable under the NDPS Act approached the High Court for bail.

It is alleged that he along with two other accused persons allegedly conspired for illicit traffic of ganja and Methamphetamine.

The Petitioner's Counsel submitted that there is not even an iota of evidence against his client. It was argued that no contraband was seized from the Petitioner and that he was arrayed only based on some telephonic conversation with the co-accused. It was also argued that the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS is not applicable in this case.

The Court noted that the first bail application of the Petitioner was dismissed on January 09, 2025 after considering all his contentions. It noted that the present bail application was filed on February 12, 2025. The Court stated that a second bail application need not be entertained when there is no change of circumstances.

Relying upon Section 29 of the NDPS Act, the Court stated that an accused can be convicted even without actual possession of contraband when there is evidence to show that there is abetment and criminal conspiracy.

Furthermore, while examining the admissibility of call records between the Petitioner and the co-accused, the Court held that the admissibility of evidence need not be considered at the bail application stage.

It stated that a bail court need not consider admissibility of evidence, but must only consider whether there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such offence.

The Court observed that bail court cannot reject a legal point or a point raised on merit by saying that it would amount to prima facie finding which would affect investigation and trial. It stated that the Court has a duty to consider the points raised by the accused and such consideration would only amount to a prima facie opinion at the bail application stage.

Court said, “Bail court cannot escape from dealing with that contention by observing that, it amounts to a “prima facie finding” in a bail application, which will be used by the accused or the prosecution, as the case may be. I make it clear that, no court shall rely on a “prima facie finding” by the bail court, while deciding the main case finally. Similarly, the investigating agency shall not stop the investigation, because there is a prima facie finding that, no offence is made out. Investigating officer can proceed with the case, untrammeled by the observation of the bail court.”

In the facts of the case, the court stated that a prima facie case was made out against the Petitioner and the bail application cannot be entertained. However, the Court clarified that these prime facie findings are only for deciding bail application and should not influence the trial of the main case before the trial court.

As such, the bail application was dismissed.

Case Title: Anzar Azeez v State of Kerala

Case No: BAIL APPL. NO. 2181 OF 2025

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 144