Kerala High Court denies anticipatory bail to nine men accused of assaulting a lawyer who drafted a complaint against them, stressing the impact on justice and legal access.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
KERALA: In a landmark decision, the Kerala High Court, on July 17, 2025, refused to grant anticipatory bail to nine individuals accused of brutally assaulting a lawyer, Asif Rahman, for merely performing his professional duty, drafting a legal complaint against them.
ALSO READ: Female Lawyer Assault Case| Kerala Court Grants Bail to Accused Advocate Beyline Das
Advocate Asif Rahman was reportedly assaulted on April 29, 2025, while riding his motorcycle around 10:00 p.m. in Kozhikode. He suffered serious injuries, including chest trauma and a vertebral fracture. The accused, alleged to be political leaders, targeted him because he had drafted a complaint against them on behalf of a client.
The nine accused were booked under multiple provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (BNS), included Section 189(2) for threatening a public servant, Section 191(3) for causing hurt with dangerous weapons, Section 115(2) for attempting to commit an offence punishable with life imprisonment, and Section 126(2) which deals with assault with intent.
Additionally, they were charged under Sections 118(1) and 118(2) for concealment of offence, Section 110 for abetment, Section 190 for criminal intimidation, and Section 296(b) for rioting with deadly weapons.
Court’s Observation
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, while rejecting the anticipatory bail plea, made notable observations about the implications of such assaults.
“Assaulting an Advocate for drafting a complaint cannot be viewed lightly. The fundamental right to have access to courts of law is enabled largely through Advocates.”
He added,
“If Advocates are attacked for drafting complaints rule of law will suffer.”
The Court emphasized that the attack appeared to be motivated by the complaint drafted by the advocate, in which the first accused was the primary respondent. This, coupled with the severity of the injuries and the use of dangerous weapons, justified the need for custodial interrogation.
Referring to the Supreme Court’s ruling in P. Krishna Mohan Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2025), the High Court reiterated that anticipatory bail can weaken the effectiveness of police interrogation when a suspect feels insulated.
As a result, the Court dismissed the Bail application. Custodial interrogation was allowed to recover the weapon and examine the motive.
Case Title: Riyas & Ors. v. State of Kerala
BAIL APPL. NO. 7805 OF 2025
READ ORDER HERE
Click Here to Read More Reports On Kerala High Court
