Kerala HC Stays Remand Order of Thalassery Sessions Court, Directs Immediate Release of 17 Accused
Finding the remand order ex facie illegal, Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath stayed the order without waiting for State instructions and directed the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Thalassery to release all 17 accused forthwith.
The High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam, on 26 May 2026, stayed a remand order passed by the Additional District and Sessions Court-III, Thalassery, Kannur, which had sent 17 accused persons to judicial custody. Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath, sitting singly, held the impugned order to be ex facie illegal and, on that basis alone, dispensed with the need to seek instructions from the Public Prosecutor before granting relief. The court directed the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Thalassery to issue a release order immediately and communicate the High Court's order by e-mail to both the Sessions Court and the concerned jail.
The Accused and the Underlying Case
The bail application was filed by 17 persons, all residents of Kannur district, who had been remanded to judicial custody in connection with Crime No. 202/2018 registered at Mattannur Police Station, Kannur. The case was being tried as SC 596/2018 before the Additional District and Sessions Court-III, which also functions as the Additional MACT and Rent Control Appellate Authority at Thalassery.
The 17 petitioners ranged in age from 29 to 56 years. They were represented by a team of advocates including S. Rajeev, V. Vinay, M.S. Aneer, Sarath K.P., Anilkumar C.R., K.S. Kiran Krishnan, Dipa V., Akash Cherian Thomas, Azad Sunil, T.P. Aravind, Akshara S., Nivedita Rajeev, and Veena Hari. The State of Kerala was represented by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala.
The Court's Reasoning: Ex Facie Illegality
After hearing Senior Counsel S. Rajeev for the applicants, Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath concluded that the remand order was ex facie illegal. The court recorded that because the illegality was apparent on the face of the order, it was “not necessary to get instructions from the learned Public Prosecutor.”
The digest does not set out the specific grounds on which the remand order was found to be facially illegal. However, the court's decision to bypass the usual step of seeking the prosecution's response — and to stay the remand order at the very first hearing — reflects the weight it attached to the apparent defect in the Sessions Court's order.
The court also called for a remark from the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Thalassery. The Registry was directed to send a copy of the bail application to the Sessions Judge in a sealed cover, and the Sessions Judge was required to submit remarks to the Registry, which would then place them before the High Court in a sealed cover. This procedure suggests the High Court intends to examine the Sessions Court's conduct or reasoning before the next date.
Directions Issued
The court's directions were precise and time-sensitive. The Additional Sessions Judge-III, Thalassery was directed to issue a release order for all 17 applicants from judicial custody forthwith. The Registry was required to communicate the order by e-mail to the Additional Sessions Court, Thalassery and to the concerned jail immediately.
The matter was posted for further hearing on 5 June 2026, by which date the sealed-cover remarks from the Sessions Judge are expected to be placed before the court.
Order
In Bail Appl. No. 2930 of 2026, Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath stayed the remand order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Thalassery in SC 596/2018 arising from Crime No. 202/2018 of Mattannur Police Station, Kannur. All 17 accused were directed to be released from judicial custody forthwith. The Registry was directed to communicate the order by e-mail to the Sessions Court and the concerned jail. The matter is listed for 5 June 2026.