The Kerala High Court on Saturday, 29 November 2025, declined to grant pre-arrest bail to film director Dhinil Babu in a case involving allegations of outraging the modesty of an actress inside a production office in Ernakulam. The application was heard by Justice Dr. Kauser Edappagath.
Background of the Case
The case stems from Crime No. 749/2025 registered at the Ernakulam Town South Police Station. According to the prosecution, the incident allegedly took place on 11 October 2025 at 7 PM, when the accused reportedly invited the complainant to an office inside the Fore Castle Building, claiming to discuss a movie project. The actress alleged that once inside, she was taken to a room and assaulted.
Read also:- Gauhati High Court Upholds ART Age Limits, Rejects Plea Seeking IVF Access Beyond Statutory Cut-Off
The offences invoked include Sections 74, 75(1), and 126(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
Prosecution’s Stand
State Prosecutor Sri. M.C. Ashi opposed the bail request, arguing that the act appeared premeditated. The court recorded the State’s apprehension that releasing the accused at this stage could impact the investigation.
“The possibility of influencing witnesses cannot be ruled out,” the prosecution submitted, while stressing the need for custodial interrogation to collect evidence.
Read also:- Jammu & Kashmir High Court Orders Status Quo After Udhampur Shop Demolition, Hears 5 Crore Compensation Plea
Arguments by the Accused
The defence argued that the accusations were fabricated and claimed a false implication. They also produced a pen drive allegedly containing a conversation suggesting an extortion attempt by a mediator. However, the Court examined the material and held that it did not support the defence version or connect to the case.
Court’s Observations
Justice Edappagath emphasised that pre-arrest bail is not a routine remedy and must be granted only in special circumstances. After perusing the case diary, the Court noted that the allegations were serious and supported by specific claims in the First Information Statement (FIS).
The order states that the material on record “prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act,” and highlights the allegation that the accused restrained the woman and “caught hold of her breast and outraged her modesty,” attracting Section 74 BNS.
Decision
After considering the seriousness of the offence, the need for custodial interrogation, and the ongoing investigation, the High Court dismissed the pre-arrest bail plea.
“It is not a fit case where extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of BNSS could be invoked,” the Court concluded before rejecting the application.
Case Title:- Dhinil Babu v. State of Kerala
Case Number:- Bail Application No. 13422/2025
