- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2857 CRL.P No. 9964 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9964 OF 2024 (438(Cr.PC) / 482(BNSS)) BETWEEN: THABRAZ @ SHAIK TAYYAB SHARIFF, S/O SHAIK AMJAD SHARIFF, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/AT NO. 14, 8TH CROSS, 1ST MAIN ROAD, NEAR AL HABEEB HOSPITAL, GANDHI NAGAR, BANGALORE - 45. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SREENIVASA KUMAR D.G, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY PEENYA POLICE STATION, BANGALORE, REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. HARISH GANAPATHY, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.438 OF CR.P.C (U/S 482 BNSS) PRAYING TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.505/2023 OF RESPONDENT PEENYA P.S., BANGALORE REGISTERED FOR ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S 120(B), 419, 395, 397, 201 OF IPC, SEC. 25(1)(B)(B) ARMS ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED XXXI ACMM, BANGALORE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2857 CRL.P No. 9964 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel for petitioner, learned High Court Government Pleader for the State and perused the material on record. 2. Petitioner / accused No.12 has preferred this petition seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.505/2023 of Peenya Police Station, registered for the offence punishable under Section 397 and 419 of IPC. 3. FIR was registered against Somashekar. R, Sridhar. R. and six to seven un-known persons, on a complaint lodged by one Rupesh. M. S/o. Manohar. R. 4. Charge sheet is filed against 13 accused showing accused Nos.12 and 13 as absconding. Petitioner is arraigned as accused No.12. 5. The case of the prosecution in brief is that, on 04.12.2023 at about 07:30 p.m., when the complainant was in his house bearing No.706, Ajjimane, Nagasandra, Bengaluru- 73, someone rang the calling bell. When he opened the door, two persons who were in police uniform entered the house stating that they want to talk with him. Immediately, five more - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2857 CRL.P No. 9964 of 2024 persons barged inside the house and showing deadly weapons, tied and assaulted the complainant and his mother. They robbed cash of Rs.60 Lakhs and gold ornaments, in all worth of Rs.85 Lakhs. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that in this case, accused Nos.1 to 11 are already enlarged on bail. Name of the petitioner is not in the FIR. He is innocent of the alleged offence. He has no criminal antecedents. He is ready and willing to abide by any conditions. Accordingly, sought to allow the petition and enlarge the petitioner on bail. 7. Learned High Court Government Pleader has opposed the prayer for bail contending that all the accused have hatched a plan to commit robbery in the house of the complainant and entered the house armed with deadly weapons and robbed huge cash and gold. He contended that incriminating articles have been recovered from the accused who are arrested and some more articles have to be recovered from the present petitioner, such as gold hangings, jumaki, bangles as well as cash. He has contended that the petitioner is required for custodial interrogation and therefore, he is not entitled for the relief sought. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2857 CRL.P No. 9964 of 2024 8. A perusal of the entire material on record goes to show that all the accused have committed robbery in the house of the complainant wherein, two of them by posing themselves as police officials, initially entered the complainant's house and remaining accused have barged in later, holding weapons. Accused Nos.1 to 11 are granted regular bail. Petitioner is still absconding from the date of commission of offence. As per prosecution, certain recoveries have to be made from the petitioner. Therefore, petitioner is required for custodial interrogation. Grant of anticipatory bail to him may thwart further investigation of the case. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence committed, this is not a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the following:- ORDER i) Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE LDC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26