Kafir screenshot case in Kerala: Court rejects SIT’s plea to cancel bail of prime accused Jithin Bhaskaran

The Vadakara First Class Magistrate’s Court in Kozhikode on Friday, July 17, 2026, dismissed the application filed by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) seeking cancellation of bail granted to Jithin Bhaskaran, local leader of Democratic Youth Federation of India (DYFI) and prime accused in the controversial ‘blasphemous’ screenshot case.

After hearing evidence from both the prosecution and the defence, the court rejected the SIT’s key contention that Mr Bhaskaran had breached his bail conditions upon his release from judicial custody.

The prosecution’s allegation was that the defendant breached his bail conditions after being released on bail on July 3 by posting messages on Facebook in which he allegedly challenged the investigation team. He also raised concerns in court for allegedly trying to create civil unrest in the area and interfering with the course of the investigation.

case

The case, which sparked widespread political controversy in Kerala during the Vadakara Lok Sabha election campaign, relates to the distribution of a screenshot depicting Congress candidate Shafi Parambil as a devout Muslim and CPI(M) candidate KK Shailaja as a kafir (non-believer), falsely attributing the post to Muslim Youth League worker Muhammad Kasim.

According to the prosecution, Mr. Bhaskaran, a former member of DYFI Vadakara block committee and CPI(M) Thuruthi local committee, allegedly sent the controversial screenshot to around 200 recipients using WhatsApp’s broadcast feature and tried to destroy all relevant digital evidence. The prosecution claimed that the regional forensic unit found evidence supporting these allegations.

He was arrested by the Special Investigation Team on June 16, 2026.

Meanwhile, the Kozhikode Sessions Court on Friday granted anticipatory bail to DYFI leader Ribesh Ramakrishnan, who had sought legal protection ahead of a potential arrest. Chief Justice VS Bindhukumari granted the application after Mr. Ramakrishnan approached the court anticipating that he would be named as an accused in the ongoing investigation. Earlier, as part of the investigation, the SIT had issued a notice summoning Mr. Bhaskaran for questioning based on his statement.