- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.89 OF 2014 C/W CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.88 OF 2014 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.117 OF 2014 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.138 OF 2014 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.149 OF 2014 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.279 OF 2015 IN CRL.A No.89/2014 BETWEEN: M. S. ARUNKUMAR @ ARUN @ ANNI S/O. SHIVAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS RESIDING AT DARGA ROAD, 4TH BLOCK MADHUGIRI-572 132 TUMKUR DISTRICT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI CHETHAN B., ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KIBBANAHALLI POLICE STATION TIPTUR-572 201 TUMKUR DISTRICT …RESPONDENT (BY SRI DIWAKAR MADDUR, H.C.G.P.) Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.374(2) CR.P.C BY THE ADV., FOR THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.4 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 25.01.2014 PASSED BY THE V ADDL. DIST. AND S.J., TIPTUR IN S.C.NO.2/13-CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.4 FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S.399 AND 201 OF IPC AND THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.4 IS SENTENCED TO UNDERGO R.I. FOR 4 YEARS AND TO PAY FINE OF RS.10,000/- IN DEFAULT OF PAYMENT OF FINE TO UNDERGO S.I. FOR FURTHER PERIOD OF TWO MONTHS FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.399 OF IPC. AND THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.4 IS SENTENCED TO UNDERGO R.I. FOR 2 YEARS AND TO PAY FINE OF RS.2,000/- IN DEFAULT OF PAYMENT OF FINE TO UNDERGO S.I. FOR FURTHER PERIOD OF ONE MONTH FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S. 201 OF IPC BOTH THE SENTENCES SHALL RUN CONCURRENTLY. IN CRL.A NO.88/2014 BETWEEN: D. R. ROHITH AGED 19 YEARS S/O. RENUKAPRASAD R/O. YALLAPURA BEHIND RICE MILL TUMKUR. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI VIJAYA KUMARA, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KIBBANAHALLI POLICE STATION TUMKUR DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI DIWAKAR MADDUR, H.C.G.P.) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S. 374(2) CR.P.C BY THE ADV., FOR THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.5 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 25.01.2014 PASSED BY THE V ADDL. DIST. AND S.J., TIPTUR IN S.C.NO.2/13- CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.5 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S. 399 AND 201 OF IPC AND THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.5 IS SENTENCED TO UNDERGO R.I. FOR 4 YEARS AND TO PAY FINE OF RS.10,000/- IN DEFAULT OF PAYMENT OF FINE TO UNDERGO S.I. FOR FURTHER PERIOD OF TWO MONTHS FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 399 OF IPC AND THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.5 IS SENTENCED TO UNDERGO R.I. FOR 2 YEARS AND TO PAY FINE OF RS.2,000/- IN DEFAULT OF PAYMENT OF FINE TO UNDERGO S.I. FOR FURTHER PERIOD OF ONE MONTH FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 201 OF IPC BOTH THE SENTENCES SHALL RUN CONCURRENTLY. IN CRL.A NO.117/2014 BETWEEN: 1. T. P. PRAVEENA @ JANGLI AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS S/O. PUTTARAJU RESIDING OPPOSITE JAYABHARAT TALKIES MANDIPET-572 101 TUMKUR DISTRICT 2. J. RAJESHA AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS S/O. LATE JOTHAPPA RESIDING AT KEREGALA PALYA MADHUGIRI-572 132 TUMKUR DISTRICT ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI CHETHAN B., ADVOCATE) - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KIBBANAHALLI POLICE STATION TIPTUR-572 201 TUMKUR DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI DIWAKAR MADDUR, H.C.G.P.) THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.374(2) CR.P.C BY THE ADV. FOR THE APPELLANTS/ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE DATED 25.01.2014 PASSED BY THE V ADDL. DIST. AND S.J., TIPTUR IN S.C.NO.2/2013- CONVICTING THE APPELLANTS/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S. 399 AND 201 OF IPC, THE APPELLANTS/ACCUSED ARE SENTENCED TO UNDERGO R.I. FOR 4 YEARS AND PAY FINE OF RS.10,000/- EACH, IN DEFAULT TO PAY FINE, THEY SHALL UNDERGO S.I. FOR FURTHER PERIOD OF 2 MONTHS FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S. 399 OF IPC AND THE APPELLANTS/ACCUSED ARE SENTENCED TO UNDERGO R.I. FOR 2 YEARS AND PAY FINE OF RS.2,000/- EACH, IN DEFAULT TO PAY FINE, HE SHALL UNDERGO S.I. FOR FURTHER PERIOD OF 1 MONTH FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S. 201 OF IPC, BOTH THE SENTENCES SHALL RUN CONCURRENTLY. IN CRL.A NO.138/2014 BETWEEN: SUNIL KUMAR S/O. VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS R/O. CHANNAPANA PALYA TUMKUR DISTRICT ...APPELLANT (BY SRI MADHUKAR NADIG, ADVOCATE) - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS AND: STATE BY KIBBANAHALLI POLICE STATION REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001 ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI DIWAKAR MADDUR, H.C.G.P.) THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.374(2) CR.P.C BY THE ADV., FOR THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.3 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 25.01.2014 PASSED BY THE V ADDL. DIST. AND S.J., TIPTUR IN S.C.NO.2/13- CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.4 FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S. 399 AND 201 OF IPC AND THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.3 IS SENTENCED TO UNDERGO R.I. FOR 4 YEARS AND TO PAY FINE OF RS.10,000/- IN DEFAULT OF PAYMENT OF FINE TO UNDERGO S.I. FOR FURTHER PERIOD OF TWO MONTHS FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S. 399 OF IPC AND THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.3 IS SENTENCED TO UNDERGO R.I. FOR 2 YEARS AND TO PAY FINE OF RS.2,000/- IN DEFAULT OF PAYMENT OF FINE TO UNDERGO S.I. FOR FURTHER PERIOD OF ONE MONTH FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 201 OF IPC BOTH THE SENTENCES SHALL RUN CONCURRENTLY. IN CRL.A NO.149/2014 BETWEEN: M. N. MALATHESHA S/O. NARASIMHAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS RESIDING OPPOSITE POST OFFICE TUMKUR GATE MADHUGIRI-572 132 TUMKUR DISTRICT. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI CHETHAN B., ADVOCATE) - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KIBBANAHALLI POLICE STATION TIPTUR-572 201 TUMKUR DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI DIWAKAR MADDUR, H.C.G.P.) THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.374(2) CR.P.C BY THE ADV., FOR THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.6 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE DATED 25.01.2014 PASSED BY THE V ADDL. DIST. AND S.J., TIPTUR IN S.C.NO.2/13-CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.6 FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S. 399 AND 201 OF IPC AND THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED IS SENTENCED TO UNDERGO R.I. FOR 4 YEARS AND TO PAY FINE OF RS.10,000/-, IN DEFAULT OF PAYMENT OF FINE, HE SHALL UNDERGO S.I. FOR FURTHER PERIOD OF TWO MONTHS FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S. 399 OF IPC AND THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED IS SENTENCED TO UNDERGO R.I. FOR 2 YEARS AND TO PAY FINE OF RS.2,000/- IN DEFAULT OF PAYMENT OF FINE, HE SHALL UNDERGO S.I. FOR FURTHER PERIOD OF ONE MONTH FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S. 201 OF IPC BOTH THE SENTENCES SHALL RUN CONCURRENTLY. IN CRL.A NO. 279/2015 BETWEEN: KIRAN AGE 20 YEARS S/O. SIDDAPPA R/O. 1ST MAIN ROAD, 5TH CROSS BANK COLONY, CANARA LAYOUT BENGALURU-39 ...APPELLANT (BY SRI VIJAYA KUMARA, ADVOCATE) - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KIBBANAHALLI POLICE STATION TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 201 ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI DIWAKAR MADDUR, H.C.G.P.) THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.374(2) CR.P.C BY THE ADV. FOR THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.7 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMNET AND SENTENCE DATED 25.01.2014 PASSED BY THE V ADDL. DIST. AND S.J., TIPTUR IN S.C.NO.2/2013-CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.399 AND 201 OF IPC AND THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED IS SENTENCED TO UNDERGO R.I. FOR 4 YEARS AND PAY FINE OF RS.10,000/-, IN DEFAULT TO PAY FINE, HE SHALL UNDERGO S.I. FOR FURTHER PERIOD OF 2 MONTHS FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S. 399 OF IPC AND THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED IS SENTENCED TO UNDERGO R.I. FOR 2 YEARS AND PAY FINE OF RS.2,000/-, IN DEFAULT TO PAY FINE, HE SHALL UNDERGO S.I. FOR FURTHER PERIOD OF 1 MONTH FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S. 201 OF IPC BOTH THE SENTENCES SHALL RUN CONCURRENTLY. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS ORAL JUDGMENT Criminal Appeal No.89/2014 is by accused No.4, Crl.A.No.88/2014 is by accused No.5, Crl.A.No.117/2014 is by accused Nos.1 and 2, Crl.A.No.138/2017 is by accused No.3, Crl.A.No.149/2014 is by accused No.6 and Crl.A.No.279/2015 is by accused No.7 being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 25.01.2015 passed in Special Case No.2/2013 on the file of V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiptur, ('trial Court' for brevity) by which, the trial Court has passed the following order; By exercising powers U/S.235 Cr.P.C., accused No.1 to 7 are convicted for the offences punishable U/Ss.399 & 201 of LP.C, accused No.8 to 10 are acquitted for the offences punishable U/Ss.399 & 201 of I.P.C; Accused No.1 to 13, 16 & 17 are acquitted for the offence punishable U/S.400 LP.C.; accused No.1 to 17 are acquitted for the offence P/U/S.120-B I.P.C. and accused No.1 is acquitted for the offence punishable U/S.25 of Arms Act. The bail bonds of accused No.8, 10, 11, 14 & 15 stands cancelled. Jail S.P. is directed to release accused No.9, 12, 13 & 16 forthwith, if they are not required in any other case. Case is posted to hear before sentence of accused No.1 to 7." - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS 2. The case of prosecution is that on 06.06.2012 at 09.15 p.m. at Tiptur-Chikkanayakanahally road near Bennanayakanahalli gate within the jurisdiction of Tiptur Rural Police Station, accused No.1 to 10 along with absconded accused Rama and Lava had made preparation for commission of offence of dacoity. 3. According to the prosecution accused No.1 carried a pistol in his pant pocket; accused No.2 carried chilly powder packet and a mobile phone set in his pant pocket; accused No.3 carried a plastic thread and a mobile phone in the pant pocket; accused No.4 carried a red coloured purse containing cash of Rs.200 and a driving license card in his pant pocket; accused No.5 carried a mobile phone; accused No.6 carried Rs.150 cash and mobile phone; and accused No.7 carried a plastic thread in his pant pocket; who had come in a white coloured Indigo car bearing No.KA-02-D8009, blue coloured Indigo Car bearing No.KA-02-MB-7209 and Apachi Motorcycle bearing No.KA-06- EH-8566 and TVS Star City Motorcycle bearing No.KA-02-EC- 4752; in addition, keeping wooden wicket, an iron knife, three iron longs with an intention of committing dacoity on one - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS Shantha Kumar, the copra merchant who was to pass en-route the said road in his Maruti Swift Car bearing KA No.44-MB.3838 between 08:30 to 09:30 p.m.; thereby committing offence punishable under Section 399 and 201 of IPC. Accused No.1 had committed offence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. While accused Nos. 1 to 10 being associated with the gang of accused Nos.11 to 13, 16 to 17, being habitual offenders of committing dacoity, thus punishable under Section 400 of IPC. 4. It is a further case of the prosecution that accused Nos. 14 and 15 had given the information about movement of Shanta Kumar on the said road to accused Nos. 11 to 13, 16 to 17 who were in judicial custody at Tumkur jail, who in turn had informed and instigated accused Nos. 1 to 10 to commit the offence. Thus, accused Nos.1 to 17 were also liable to punishment under Section 120B of IPC. 5. Accordingly, case in Crime No.57/2012 came to be registered by the jurisdictional Police under Sections 399, 400, 120B and 201 of IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. A - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS charge sheet was filed. Accused pleaded not guilty. Accordingly the matter was set down for trial. 6. Prosecution examined 11 witnesses marked as PW1 to PW11 and exhibited 19 documents marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P19 and 20 material objects as MO1 to MO.20. In the statement recorded under Section 313 of Cr.PC, accused persons denied all the incriminating evidence and circumstances produced by the prosecution against them. 7. The trial Court framed the following points for its consideration; "1) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that on 06.06.2012 at 9.15 p.m., at Tiptur Chikkanayakanahalli road near Bennayanakanahalli Gate within the jurisdiction of Tiptur Rural Police Station, accused No. 1 to 10, 14 & 15 along with absconded accused Rama and Lava made preparation by having Pistol in pant packet of accused No.1, Chilly powder packet and a mobile phone set in pant packets of accused No.2; a plastic thread and a Mobile phone set in pant packets of accused No.3; accused No.4 was in possession of a Red coloured purse with cash of Rs.200/- and D.L.Card; accused No.5 was in possession of a mobile phone set; accused No.6 was in possession of Rs.150/-cash and a Mobile Phone set & accused No. 7 was in possession of a plastic thread in his pant packet; accused No.1 to 10, 14 & 15 came to said place in White coloured Indica Car bearing No.ΚΑ.02-D.8009, blue coloured Indigo Car bearing No.KA.02-MB, 7209, Apachi Motor cycle bearing No.KA.06- EH.8566 and TVS Star City Motor Cycle bearing No.KA.02- EC.4752; accused kept a wooden wicket, an Iron knife in Car bearing No.KA02.D-8009 and three Iron longs in Indigo Car bearing No.KA.02-MB.7209 and accused have changed the Mahindra Scorpio Car number to Indigo car No.KA.02- MB.7209 and changed the XL Heavy duty number to Star City - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS Motor cycle No.KA.06-EC.1752 for committing dacoity of Maruthi Swift Car bearing No.KA.44. MB.3838 of one Shantha Kumar, the Copra merchant who would come in said room in between 8.30 to 9.30 p.m. and thereby committed the offence punishable U/S.399 I.P.C.? 2) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that on 06.06.2012 at 9.15 p.m., at Tiptur- Chikkanayakanahalli road near Bennayanakanahalli Gate accused No.1 to 10 associated with a gang of accused No.11 to 13, 16 & 17 for the purpose of habitually committing dacoity, and thereby accused No.1 to 13, 16 & 17 have committed an offence punishable U/S.400 1.P.C.? 3) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that on 04.06.12 in the Tumkur Jail; accused No.11 to 13, 16 & 17 agreed with accused No.1 to 10 to commit dacoity of one Shantha Kumar, Copra Merchant who was going in his Maruthi Swift vehicle with heavy cash at Shettikere road as per the information given by accused No.14 & 15 and besides the above said agreement, that accused No.14 & 15 have given information about said Shantha Kumar's activities to accused No.1 to 10 and accused No. 1 to 10 did some acts i.e., made preparations by having Pistol, Iron Knife, Plastic threads, Longs, Chilly powder packet and Chikkanayakanahalli near Bennayanakanahalli Gate on 06.06.12 in pursuance of the said agreement to commit the offence of dacoity Punishable with imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment for a term of 10 years and thereby committed an offence punishable U/S. 120-B of I.P.C.? 4) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that on 06.06.12 in Tiptur-Chikkanayakanahalli near Bennayanakanahalli Gate within the jurisdiction of Tiptur Rural Police Station, accused knowing or having reason to believe that the offence, namely preparation for committing dacoity punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term of 10 years has been committed, caused certain evidence connected with the said offence, namely changed the Star City Motor Cycle bearing No.KA.02-EC.4752 to XL Heavy Duty Motor cycle bearing No.KA.06-EC.1752 and changed the Mahindra Scorpio Car number to Indigo car No.KA.02- MB.7209 to disappear with intention to screen the offenders from legal punishment, and thereby accused No.1 to 10 have committed an offence punishable U/S.201 I.P.C.? 5) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that on 06.06.12 in Tiptur-Chikkanayakanahalli near Bennayanakanahalli Gate within the jurisdiction of Tiptur - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS Rural Police Station, accused No.1 was in possession of black coloured Pistol bearing No.KANEA AIR PISTOL in contravention of S.5 of the Arms Act i.e., without license and thereby accused No.1 has committed the offence punishable U/S.25 Arms Act? 6) What order?" 8. On appreciation of evidence Trial Court answered point Nos.1 and 4 partly in the affirmative; Point Nos.2, 3 and 5 in the negative. Consequently, convicted accused Nos.1 to 7 for the offence punishable under Section 399 and 201 of IPC. Accused No.8 to 10 were acquitted of the said offences. Accused Nos.1 to 13, 16 and 17 were also acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 400 of IPC. All the accused were acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 120B of IPC. Accused No.1 is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959. 9. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of sentence for the offences punishable under Sections 399 and 201 of IPC, accused Nos.1 to 7 are before this Court in these appeals as noted above. 10. Learned counsel for the accused/appellant Nos. 1 to 7 at the outset submits that Section 399 of IPC which provides for - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS punishment for preparation to commit dacoity inherently requires prosecution to prove and establish offence of conspiracy as contemplated under Section 120B of IPC. That since the trial Court has acquitted all the accused persons for the said offence, nothing remains for the trial Court to proceed further to convict the appellants/accused Nos.1 to 7 for the offence punishable under Section 399 and Section 201 of IPC. 10.1. That according to prosecution, the alleged information regarding movement of victim was passed on by accused Nos. 14 and 15 to accused Nos.11 to 13 and 16 to 17, who were admittedly in the judicial custody and the said information was obtained and passed on by the Superintendent of Police, Tumkur Jail to the Police Sub-Inspector of Kabbanahalli. The said Superintendent of Police, who had allegedly had the first- hand information, has not been examined by the prosecution. 10.2. That the trial Court has found accused Nos.14 and 15, 11 to 13, 16 and 17 to be innocent of the offences alleged and has accordingly acquitted them of all the charges. Thus, the substratum of the case of the prosecution has been negated by - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS the trial Court leaving no basis for convicting and sentencing accused Nos.1 to 7 for the alleged offences. 10.3. Referring to the evidence of PW.1 to PW.3, who are the witnesses to mahazar drawn at Ex.P1, he submits that the said witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution in any manner whatsoever. However, the trial Court, erroneously relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State through P.S. Lodhi Colony and Sanjeev Nanda reported in (2012)3 SC (Crl.) 899, has held that the suggestion made to the said witness has to be read in favour of the prosecution. He submits that the said reasoning assigned by the trial Court is erroneous and baseless, which is the only ground which has persuaded by the trial Court to convict accused Nos. 1 to 7 without there being any material evidence of any nature whatsoever. 10.4. That according to the prosecution, accused persons have allegedly used a Indica car bearing registration No.KA-02- D.8009 belonging to PW6. The said witnesses has turned hostile and has not supported the case of prosecution. While - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS the prosecution has not examined the owner of other car bearing KA-02 MB.7209. 10.5. That even the allegation of accused Nos.1 to 7 changing the number plate of the vehicles from Mahindra Scorpio car to the Indigo car is also not proved as the owner of Mahindra Scorpio car has not been examined. 10.6. Thus, the prosecution has failed to make out a case even for the offence punishable under Section 201 of the IPC. Thus, he submits the trial Court has on surmises passed the judgment and order convicting and sentencing the accused Nos.1 to 7 for the offence punishable Section 399 and 201 of IPC requiring intervention at the hands of this Court and seeks for allowing of these appeals. 11. Per contra, learned HCGP submits that the accused Nos.1 to 7 are the habitual offenders. They were arrested at the spot with the equipments/weapons found in their possession as well as in the two cars used by them. The arrest and possession of the said weapons has been recorded in the spot mahazar at Ex.P1. PW1 to PW3 though have not supported the case of - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS prosecution, they have been suggested by the prosecution about the ingredients of Ex.P1. That though a witness turned hostile, his entire testimony need not be discarded, which is the principle adopted by the trial Court cannot be found fault with. 11.1 That even if accused Nos. 14, 15, 11 to 13, 16 and 17 were acquitted, ingredients of offence under Section 399 is clearly made out and established as against accused Nos.1 to 7. Therefore, the trial Court has justified in passing the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, warranting no interference at the hands of this Court. 12. Heard. Perused the records. 13. Point that arise for consideration is; "Whether on the facts and on law trial court is justified convicting accused Nos. 1 to 7 for the offence punishable under Sections 399 and 201 of IPC?" 14. According to the prosecution, the offences punishable under Sections 399, 400, 120B and 201 of IPC were allegedly committed by all the accused persons. The trial Court however has acquitted all the accused persons of the offence punishable - 18 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS under Section 120B of IPC. As rightly pointed out by learned counsel for the accused Nos.1 to 7/appellants the offence of conspiracy inherently carries with it the mental elements of meeting of minds by the accused persons for commission of an offence. Since all the accused have been acquitted of the said offence, what requires to be seen is whether the accused Nos. 1 to 7 alone could be held guilty of offence punishable Section 399 of IPC. 15. Section 399 of IPC reads as under; "399. Making preparation to commit dacoity.- Whoever makes, any preparation for committing dacoity, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine." 16. According to the case of prosecution, the information regarding movement of victim who has been examined as PW5 with the cash in his hand en-route Benniganahalli gate was passed on by accused Nos.14 and 15. In this regard, prosecution examined PW5/victim, who has indeed deposed about he having business transaction with one Venkateshwara traders, where he was apparently buying and selling copra (dry coconut). Accused No.15 was working as a writer in the said - 19 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS shop. Though PW.5 has deposed that accused No.14 was running a mobile shop opposite to the said Venkateshwara traders, in the deposition he has stated that the said mobile shop is situated opposite to RMC market and not opposite to Venkateshwara traders. 17. The trial Court has found that the prosecution has not produced any document much less evidence in the nature of call records to justify the implication of accused Nos.14 and 15 with regard to their role of passing on the information. Accordingly, the trial Court has found them to be innocent of the charges alleged against them. If this link in the chain of circumstances is taken out, the question would arise as to who has passed the information to accused Nos.11 to 13, 16 and 17 who were admittedly in judicial custody at the relevant time. Since no witness is examined in this regard, the trial Court has acquitted even accused Nos.11 to 13, 16 and 17 for the said offences. 18. Therefore, it is beyond the comprehension as to the basis on which the accused Nos.1 to 10 could have prepared and - 20 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS proceeded to commit the offence punishable under Section 399 of IPC in the absence of prosecution establishing the information allegedly sent by accused Nos.14 and 15 through accused Nos.11 to 13, 16 and 17. 19. When the very substratum of the allegation namely, passing of information by accused Nos.14 and 15 to accused Nos. 11 to 13, 16 and 17 and from there to accused Nos. 1 to 7 has not been proved by the prosecution resulting acquittal of accused Nos.14 and 15, 11 to 13, 16 and 17 of the offences alleged, only point requires consideration is on the basis of allegation of involvement of accused Nos.1 to 7 in the commission of offence. 20. The only evidence brought on by the prosecution against the said persons is Ex.P1/spot mahazar. PW1 and PW3 are the witnesses who have not only turned completely hostile but have also not responded to any of the questions or suggestions made by the prosecution supporting its case even remotely. 21. The trial Court however at paragraph Nos. 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26 of the impugned judgment and order has held as under; - 21 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS 22. When the witnesses have not supported the prosecution version, their evidence cannot be discarded in toto. Courts are entitled to rely upon such portion of evidence of prosecution witnesses who have been permitted to be cross-examined by the prosecution, as supports the prosecution case. In this regard, this Court relies on the citation reported in (2012) 3 S.C. (Crl.) 899 between State through P.S. Lodhi colony and Sanjeev Nanda wherein their lordship held as follows: "K. Criminal Trial-Witnesses-Hostile witness- Prosecution witnesses turning hostile- widespread malady, especially in high profile cases-Subversion of criminal justice system by pressure or temptation Concern expressed- Warning also issued that courts would not remain silent spectators-Penal provisions might be invoked to redress malpractice - Court's duty to determine truth-Penal Code, 1860, S.193" 23. In the above said citation, their lordship further held as follows:- "Witness turning hostile is a major disturbing factor faced by the criminal courts in India. Reasons are many for the witnesses turning hostile but of late. It is seen, especially in high profile case, that there or by other tempting offers which undermine the entire criminal justice system and people carry the impression that the mighty and powerful can always get away from the clutches of law, thereby eroding people's faith in the system. Courts, however, cannot shut their eyes to the reality. If a witness becomes hostile to subvert the judicial process, the court shall - 22 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS not stand as a mute spectator and every effort should be made to bring home to truth. Criminal justice system cannot be overturned by those gullible witnesses who act under pressure, inducement or intimidation. Section 193 IPC imposes punishment for giving false evidence but is seldom invoked." 24. In Bhajju @ Karan Singh Vs. State of M.P. (2012) 4 SCC 327, & in Gudu Ram Vs. State of H.P. 2013 (1) SCCR 46, also their lordships held that courts are entitled to rely upon such portion of evidence of prosecution witness who has been permitted to be cross-examined by the prosecution, as supports the prosecution case. 25. Relying on the above said citations, this Court holds that from the cross-examination of PW-1 to 3, the court can gather that they were present at the time of drawing up of mahazer at the spot of incident. The above portion of evidence admitted by PW-1 to 3 in their cross-examination is not challenged by accused persons by cross-examining them on that point. 26. PW-4 is the H.C. and PW-9 is the ASP who raided at Bennayakanahalli Gate on credible information to PW-9, which passes on him through S.P., Tumkur. PW-4 & 9 have completely supported the prosecution version. Hence, their evidence is to be looked into." 22. The principle that the entire deposition of witness turning hostile need not be discarded would not apply to the instant case inasmuch as there is not a bit of evidence worth taking - 23 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS note of in favour of the prosecution against accused Nos.1 to 7 to link to the fact of instant case. Therefore, the application of said principle is inappropriate. Assuming even as vehemently submitted by learned HCGP that the accused Nos. 1 to 7/appellants are the habitual offenders and they were caught red handed with the weapons in their possession, the same cannot be tagged and connected to the instant case, inasmuch as the whole case of prosecution is that accused Nos. 1 to 7/appellants were found at Benniganahalli Gate, in furtherance to the information provided by accused Nos. 14 and 15 in the first instance and accused Nos. 11 to 13, 16 and 17 in the second instance. If this circumstance of the case as noted above is deleted, even if the accused Nos. 1 to 7 were found to be in possession of the weapons, and at the spot, the same cannot be linked to the offence alleged in the instant case. 23. In the absence of prosecution establishing the case of accused Nos. 1 to 7 had assembled to commit dacoity on the victim-PW.5 with motive, intention and preparation pursuant to conspiracy hatched, with the involvement of accused Nos.11 to 13, 16 and 17, no inference can be drawn against them. - 24 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS 24. As regards the allegation of accused Nos.1 to 7/appellants committing offence under Section 201 of IPC as noted above, the owner of the Car bearing No.KA-02-D-8009 who has been examined as PW6 has turned hostile. While owner of the car bearing No.KA-02-MB-7209 has not been examined. 25. Therefore, the prosecution cannot claim to have established case beyond reasonable doubt in this regard. 26. Accordingly, following; ORDER (i) Criminal Appeal No.89/2014 filed by accused No.4, Crl.A.No.88/2014 filed by accused No.5, Crl.A.No.117/2014 filed by accused Nos.1 and 2, Crl.A.No.138/2017 filed by accused No.3, Crl.A.No.149/2014 filed by accused No.6 and Crl.A.No.279/2015 filed by accused No.7 are allowed; - 25 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16475 CRL.A No. 89 of 2014 C/W CRL.A No. 88 of 2014 CRL.A No. 117 of 2014 AND 3 OTHERS (ii) The impugned order dated 25.01.2014 passed in S.C.No.02/2013 by the V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiptur, is set aside. (iii) The accused Nos.1 to 7/appellants are acquitted of the offences punishable under Section 399 and Section 201 of IPC. (iv) The accused Nos.1 to 7/appellants shall be set at liberty forthwith, if their detention is not required in any other cases. (v) Fine amount deposited, if any shall be refunded to the accused Nos.1 to 7/appellants. (vi) Bail bonds and sureties, if any, stands cancelled. (vii) Communicate copy of this order to the trial Court and concerned Prison authorities forthwith. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RU, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24