Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Bipin Varghese Bamban vs State Of Kerala on 25 May, 2026
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2737/2025
BIPIN VARGHESE BAMBAN Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF KERALA & ORS. Respondent(s)
O R D E R
I.A. No. 94322/2026:
This Criminal Appeal challenges the order dated
27.03.2024 passed by the High Court of Kerala at
Ernakulam, in Criminal Appeal No. 1314/2016, whereby
the appellant’s appeal against conviction order dated
11.11.2016 passed by the Trial Court was affirmed by
the High Court.
The appellant being accused No.2 along with two
co-accused faced trial in connection with a crime
registered pursuant to FIR No.449/2014 dated
14.09.2014 lodged with Police Station Meppadi,
District Wayanad in respect of the offences punishable
under Sections 449, 302, 392, 120B and 201 read with
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [in short
“IPC”]. The Trial Court vide judgment dated 11.11.2016
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
RADHA SHARMA
Date: 2026.05.25
in SC No.314/2014 convicted and sentenced the
16:53:32 IST
Reason:
appellant/accused No.2 and other two co-accused as
1
under:
1) The accused Nos.1 to 3 are sentenced to undergo
imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) each, and
in default of payment of the said fine, they
shall undergo simple imprisonment for three
years each under Section 302 read with 34 IPC.
2) The accused Nos.1 to 3 are sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for three years each
under Section 120-B IPC.
3) The accused Nos.1 to 3 are sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for five years each and
to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand Only) each, and in default of payment
of the said fine, they shall undergo simple
imprisonment for one year each under Section
449 read with 34 IPC.
4) The accused Nos.1 to 3 are sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for seven years each and
pay a fine of Rs.50,000/0 (Rupees Fifty
Thousand Only) each, and in default of payment
of the said fine, they shall undergo simple
imprisonment for eighteen months each under
Section 392 read with 34 IPC.
5) The accused Nos.1 to 3 are further sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years
each and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees
Fifty Thousand Only) each, and in default of
payment of the said fine, they shall undergo
simple imprisonment for one year each under
Section 201 read with 34 IPC.”
The appellant, being aggrieved by the order of
conviction passed by the Trial Court, filed Criminal
Appeal No. 1314/2016 before the High Court. The said
Criminal Appeal was dismissed by the High Court and
thereby confirmed the appellant’s conviction and
sentence of life imprisonment.
2
Aggrieved, the appellant has preferred the
present Criminal Appeal. In the said Criminal Appeal
before this Court, the appellant has preferred the
I.A. No.94322 of 2025 seeking relief of suspension of
sentence during the pendency of the present Criminal
Appeal.
This Court, vide its order dated 19.05.2025,
issued notice in the Criminal Appeal.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and
learned counsel for the State and perused the material
on record.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that
leave has been granted in this appeal as the entire
case turns on circumstantial evidence; that the
appellant has already completed substantial portion of
his jail sentence being approximately twelve years
along with remission. The appellant has a good case on
merits. Having regard to the length of his
incarceration, this Court may consider granting
interim bail pending disposal of the appeal by
allowing the interim prayer.
Per contra, learned standing counsel for the
respondent-State contended that the offences for which
the appellant has been convicted are under Sections
3
449, 302 392 and 201, which are serious in nature.
There has been reliable circumstantial evidence which
has led to the conviction of the appellant and the
same having been sustained by the High Court. The mere
grant of leave by this Court would not entitle the
appellant to interim bail. Therefore, learned counsel
submitted that the prayer for interim bail may be
rejected.
Considering the facts on record, in our view, the
case for suspension of sentence is made out.
We, therefore, allow interim bail and direct
as under:
“The appellant shall be produced before the
Trial Court as early as possible and the Trial
Court shall release him on interim bail, subject
to such conditions as it may deem appropriate to
impose to ensure his presence in the
proceedings.”It is directed that the appellant shall extend
complete cooperation in the hearing of the appeal
before this Court. The appellant shall not misuse his
liberty in any manner.
Any infraction of the conditions may entail
cancellation of the suspension of sentence granted to
the appellant.
4
With these observations, this Interlocutory
Application is allowed.
…………………………………………………J.
( B.V. NAGARATHNA )…………………………………………………J.
( UJJAL BHUYAN )
NEW DELHI;
MAY 25, 2026
5
ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.4 SECTION II-D
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). 2737/2025
BIPIN VARGHESE BAMBAN Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF KERALA & ORS. Respondent(s)
(IA No. 94322/2026 – GRANT OF BAIL)
Date : 25-05-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYANFor Appellant(s) Mr. V. K. Biju, AOR
Mr. Mohammed Khalid, Adv.
Mr. Atul Tripathi, Adv.
Ms. Anjali Mishra, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, AOR
Mrs. Anu K Joy, Adv.
Mrs. Devika A.l., Adv.
Mr. Alim Anvar, Adv.
Mr. Santhosh K, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E RI.A. No. 94322/2026:
The Interlocutory Application is allowed in terms of
the signed order. The operative portion of the order reads
as under:
“We, therefore, allow interim bail and direct as under:
“The appellant shall be produced before the Trial
Court as early as possible and the Trial Court
shall release him on interim bail, subject to
such conditions as it may deem appropriate to6
impose to ensure his presence in the
proceedings.”It is directed that the appellant shall extend
complete cooperation in the hearing of the appeal
before this Court. The appellant shall not misuse
his liberty in any manner.
Any infraction of the conditions may entail
cancellation of the suspension of sentence granted
to the appellant.”
(RADHA SHARMA) (DIVYA BABBAR)
ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
(Signed order is placed on the file)7
