- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:312 CRL.P No. 102836 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102836 OF 2024 (439(CR.PC)/483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: RAJANNA D. @ SURI S/O. DASANNA, AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O. HOSAKERE VILLAGE-572222, H. GOLLARAHATTI, MIDAGESHI HOBLI, TQ. MADHUGIRI, DIST. TUMAKUR. … PETITIONER (BY SRI CHETAN MUNNOLI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, AT DHARWAD THROUGH BYADAGI POLICE STATION. … RESPONDENT (BY SRI JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C., 483 OF BNSS 2023 SEEKING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3 ON BAIL IN SC NO.86/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HAVERI (SITTING AT RANEBENNUR) REGISTERED FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC 399 AND 402 OF IPC IN CRIME NO.121/2023 REGISTERED WITH BYADAGI POLICE STATION. MANJANNA E Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Date: 2025.01.10 11:22:58 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:312 CRL.P No. 102836 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI) This petition is filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code (for short, ‘Cr.PC’) for grant of regular bail in Crime no.121/2023 by Byadagi Police Station for offences punishable under Section 399 and 402 of Indian Penal Code (for short, ‘IPC’). 2. Sri Chetan Munnoli, learned counsel for petitioner submitted as per prosecution, on information received at 9.00 p.m. on 01.08.2023 about five persons making preparation to commit dacoity near Railway Cross, Byadagi-Motebennur road armed with weapons, ASI along with Constables and panchas reached spot. On observing from distance, they found five persons with stick and rod in their hands and wearing monkey caps were standing at spot in preparation for stopping vehicles and commit dacoity. On seeing police in uniform, they tried to run away, but were apprehended. On enquiry, they revealed their names as (1) Bharath s/o Ganapati Naik of Sirsi; (2) Anand s/o Ravi Belagali @ Belli of Ramanabailu, Sirsi (3) - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:312 CRL.P No. 102836 of 2024 Rajanna @ Soori s/o Dasanna of Hosakere Taluk Madhugiri, (4) Mahammad Shoyal @ Municipality Nalaband of Hubballi and (5) Sameer s/o Mehboobsab Doddamani of Hubballi. On search, Bharath was found holding rod, Anand was holding stick while Rajanna and others were having monkey caps and chilli powder packets. A two wheeler bearing registration no.KA-63/EQ-5657 was also recovered. They stated, they were addicted to vices. For which, they intended to commit dacoity. After conducting spot panchanama, complaint was registered on 02.08.2023 at 00.10 hours, in Crime no.121/2023. 3. It was submitted after arrest, when their statements were recorded, they provided information leading to recovery of various articles allegedly stolen earlier from various places. It was submitted, charge-sheet was filed on 08.08.2023 and matter committed to II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Haveri (sitting at Ranebennur) in S.C.no.86/2023, awaiting commencement of trial. It was submitted, though offences alleged namely under Section 399 and 402 of IPC were cognizable and as per decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Lalitha Kumari vs. Govt. of UP & Others reported in 2014 (2) SCC 1, registration of FIR was mandatory, where - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:312 CRL.P No. 102836 of 2024 information received was in respect of cognizable offences. As per complaint, information was received at 9:00 p.m. Spot panchanama would reveal complainant had sufficient time to pick up laptop and portable printer as well as arrange panchas. Prima facie non-registration of FIR, before arrest appears to be violation of procedure. It was submitted, rejection of bail by Court below was only on ground that petitioner was habitual offender, taking note of earlier incidents of theft, etc. It was submitted, antecedents alone would not be justification for implicating petitioner and sought grant of bail. 4. On other hand, Sri Jairam Siddi, learned HCGP opposed petition. It was submitted, on receipt of information on 01.08.2023, complainant proceeded to spot along with panchas and observed, petitioner along with four others were waiting at spot with stick, rod and chilli powder packets wearing monkey caps, in apparent preparation for commission of dacoity. On enquiry after apprehension, offences committed by them earlier which were similar in nature were traced, leading to recovery. As per spot panchanama, petitioner was in possession of monkey cap and chilly powder packet. As investigation was completed and charge-sheet filed, if petitioner was enlarged on - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:312 CRL.P No. 102836 of 2024 bail, there was every possibility of petitioner jumping bail or attempting to influence prosecution witnesses. Therefore, prayed for rejection of petition. 5. Heard learned counsel and perused material. From above, point that arises for consideration is: “Whether petitioner is entitled for regular bail with conditions?” 6. Same is answered in affirmative for following reasons. 7. From above, it is seen petitioner (accused no.3) along with four others is alleged to have committed offences punishable under Section 399 and 402 of IPC. Both offences alleged are cognizable. Spot panchanama indicates same was on spot using laptop and portable printer in presence of two persons as panchas who accompanied police. Despite same, without registration of FIR, petitioner was arrested, in violation of ratio in Lalitha Kumari’s case supra. Indeed learned HCGP stressed on recovery made and antecedents, But, Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:312 CRL.P No. 102836 of 2024 Uttar Pradesh reported in 2020 (11) SCC 648 has held mere antecedents would not be ground for denial of bail. 8. Admittedly, charge-sheet is filed on 08.08.2023 and petitioner is in custody since 02.08.2023. Purpose of bail is not to punish undertrial but to ensure his attendance during trial. And until guilt is proved, every accused would be deemed innocent. For above reasons, petitioner is entitled for bail. Hence, this: ORDER Petition is allowed. Petitioner/accused shall be released on bail in Crime no.121/2023 of Byadagi Police Station for offences punishable under Section 399 and 402 of IPC, subject to following conditions: a) Petitioner/accused shall execute a personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of likesum to satisfaction of trial Court. b) He shall not leave travel outside Karnataka State without prior permission. c) He shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper prosecution witnesses. d) He shall not indulge in any criminal activities. e) He shall attend Court proceedings regularly. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:312 CRL.P No. 102836 of 2024 f) He shall mark his attendance at 11:00 a.m. on every alternative Saturday before Byadagi Police Station. g) Violation of any of conditions would entitle cancellation of bail. h) It is clarified that views expressed are prima facie and shall not influence final outcome after trial. SD/- (RAVI V.HOSMANI) JUDGE CLK/RH CT:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 11