- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2354 CRL.P No. 103782 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103782 OF 2024 BETWEEN: KRISHNA DEVENDRAPPA TADASAD, S/O DEVENDRAPPA TADASAD, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O MATTURU DHULIKOPPA VILLAGE, HAVERI TQ., HAVERI DIST.-581 110. …PETITIONER (BY SRI B ANWAR BASHA, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, (THROUGH HOSAPETE TOWN P.S) REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD-580 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI PRAVEEN, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 439 OF CR.P.C. (483 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 ON BAIL IN SC NO.5080/2023 IN CONNECTION WITH CR.NO.129/2021 REGISTERED IN HOSAPETE TOWN POLICE STATION, FOR THE OFFENCES U/S 396, 216(A), 120(B), 201, 307, 302 OF IPC, PENDING TRAIL OF THE CASE BEFORE III RD ADDL.DIST.AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BALLARI, SITTING AT HOSAPETE. Digitally signed by VEDAVATHI A K Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2354 CRL.P No. 103782 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN ORAL ORDER This successive bail petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., for granting bail in respect of Cr.No.129/2021 of Hosapete Town Police Station, Bellary District and chargesheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 396, 216A, 120B, 201, 307 and 302 of IPC, now pending on the file of III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bellary (Sit at Hosapete) in S.C.No.5080/2023. 2. Heard Sri.B.Anwar Basha, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.1 and Sri.Praveen, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent/State. 3. The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint of PW.1, the Police registered the FIR as it is stated that on 20.10.2021 at about 03.30 pm, when she was in the house along with her sister, the accused - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2354 CRL.P No. 103782 of 2024 persons came and selected the cloths worth Rs.11,000/- and they asked that they wanted to make the payment by way of phonePe or online, for that the complainant has stated they do not have online payment facilities. Therefore, the accused told to keep the said articles by the side, they will come and collect by next day. Accordingly, on 22.10.2021, after two days, the accused persons came at 05.30 pm, when the complainant was in the backyard, petitioner along with others came inside and told that they have selected the items and they wanted to take the delivery of the goods. Thereafter, by coming inside, they started talking to the complainant and then tied her legs, arms and also by closing the door, they robbed the gold ornaments, cash and also attacked the sister of the complainant, who was stated to be dead subsequently. Then they fled away from the spot. After registering the FIR, the Police arrested some of the accused and on the voluntary statement of the co-accused, this petitioner is said to be arrested on 30.06.2023. His bail petition was previously rejected by the trial Court and also by this - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2354 CRL.P No. 103782 of 2024 Court on 26.06.2024, hence, once again, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that absolutely there is no evidence against this petitioner and even the eyewitness and other witnesses identified accused Nos.2 to 7 but not this accused. There is insufficient evidence against him for implicating in this case and there is no connecting evidence or no test identification parade has been conducted as against him, there is no notice given to the complainant to identify this accused which are admitted in the evidence. The trial is yet to be concluded. Hence, prayed for granting the bail. 5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent/State objected the bail petition. 6. Upon hearing the arguments and considering the evidence on record, admittedly, the prosecution has almost examined 16 witnesses. As per the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, matter is - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2354 CRL.P No. 103782 of 2024 posted for recording the statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. PW.1 identified accused Nos.2 to 7. In the examination in chief, there is no material to show the presence of the accused No.1. However, the material available on record, the recovery witnesses, panch witnesses and the receiver of the stolen articles, the pawn brokers from Manappuram Gold and other Financial Institutions have given statement or evidence before the Court that this accused No.1 came to Mehboobnagar and pledged the gold ornaments and received the money. This gold ornaments are the nothing but dacoited by the accused persons from the shop of the PW.1. This is nothing but a day light dacoity and murder. Most of the witnesses supported the case other than the Test Identification Parade conducted by the Tahsildar. It is pertinent to note the incident took place in October-2021 and some of the accused were already arrested by the Police and there were detained in jail and this petitioner was arrested only 30.06.2023 after almost 1½ years later. Therefore, when some evidence is adduced against him - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2354 CRL.P No. 103782 of 2024 and there is a denial by the counsel for the petitioner in the cross-examination, if this Court gives any opinion on the evidence adduced before the trial Court that will prejudice the case of the prosecution. That apart, the Police felt very difficult to trace out petitioner/accused No.1 and however, the Police were successful in tracing this accused and arrest him. Now the case is at the fag end of the trial, except hearing the arguments and passing the judgment by the trial Court. When such being the case, at this stage, if the bail is granted, there is every possibility of petitioner absconding from appearing before the Court and delaying the process of the Court is not ruled out. Therefore, in the interest of the prosecution, at this stage, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and accordingly, the successive bail petition filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 is dismissed. Sd/- (K.NATARAJAN) JUDGE NR/- List No.: 19 Sl No.: 1