The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram, has granted bail to 71-year-old journalist and political commentator T G Mohandas in a cyber crime case concerning alleged remarks uploaded on the YouTube channel “Pathrika” about students protesting at Jantar Mantar.
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Mithun Gopi G S passed the order on August 10, 2026, after hearing the bail application filed under Section 480 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).
Background Of The Case
The case arose from videos allegedly uploaded on July 24 and 25, 2026. According to the prosecution, the videos contained statements which could create fear and disturb public peace, including remarks concerning women protesters and statements suggesting that students protesting at Jantar Mantar should be shot.
The case was registered as Crime No. 95/2026 by the Thiruvananthapuram City Cyber Crime Police Station under Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, Section 120(o) of the Kerala Police Act and Sections 79, 192, 353(1)(b) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
The registration of the case over the YouTube remarks had also been reported in the media in July.
Court Examines Arrest Procedure
A key issue before the Magistrate was the failure to issue notice under Section 35(3) BNSS before arrest.
The Court noted that the only alleged non-bailable offence carried a maximum punishment of three years. Relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation, the Court observed that for offences punishable with imprisonment of up to seven years, issuing notice under Section 35(3) is the rule, while arrest is an exception requiring justification.
The investigating officer had cited apprehensions that Mohandas could abscond, destroy digital evidence or influence the complainant. However, the Court found no specific material supporting those apprehensions. It also noted that police had located him at his known residence and conducted a search there.
“The grounds stated for not issuing notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS were not sufficient,” the Court held, finding that the statutory requirement had not been satisfactorily complied with.
Custodial Interrogation Not Found Necessary
The Court further noted that the electronic devices allegedly connected with the case had already been recovered and seized. Mohandas had also been questioned by the police.
The prosecution's submission that the investigation was still at an early stage and that further witnesses and digital evidence remained to be examined was not considered sufficient, by itself, to justify continued custody.
The Court also took note of the accused's age and the medical concerns raised by his counsel.
Decision
Holding that further judicial custody was not warranted, the Court allowed the bail application.
Mohandas was directed to execute a bond of Rs. 50,000 with two solvent sureties for the same amount. He was also directed to appear before the investigating officer on August 11, 12 and 13, and thereafter every Monday for two months or until filing of the final report, whichever was earlier.
The Court permitted him to use digital platforms and social media for ordinary professional and legitimate journalistic purposes, while restraining him from using such platforms in relation to the alleged incident in a manner intended to influence, intimidate or interfere with the investigation or administration of justice.
