GIRISH @ GIRI @ KULLA GIRI v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
CRL.P/2385/2026 · 2026-06-12
M Nagaprasanna
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 21262 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 21262 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28675 CRL.P No. 2385 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2385 OF 2026 BETWEEN:
GIRISH @ GIRI @ KULLA GIRI, S/O. GANGADHARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT. NO. 6TH CROSS, 1ST MAIN, LAGGERE, CHOWDESHWARINAGARA, BENGALURU-560058.
MOBILE 97424 42632 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHANKAR M NAIK, ADVOCATE) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY KAMAKSHIPALYA POLICE, BENGALURU-560079.
REPT BY S.P.P., HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 (FILED U/S.528 BNSS) CR.P.C TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDING IN S.C.NO.969/2025 AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 399, 402 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LVI ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-57), TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.
Digitally signed by SANJEEVINI J KARISHETTY Location: High Court of Karnataka
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28675 CRL.P No. 2385 of 2026
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner-accused No.3 is at the doors of this Court calling in question the continuance of the proceedings in S.C.No.969/2025 registered for offences punishable under Sections 399 and 402 of the IPC.
2. Heard Sri.Shankar M Naik,
learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.K.Nageshwarappa, learned HCGP appearing for the respondent and have perused the material on record. 3. The petitioner along with others gets embroiled in a crime in Crime No.186/2016. The police after investigation file a charge sheet. The matter was Committed to the Court of Session and tried as S.C.No.969/2025. At the relevant point in time, the petitioner was not available for trial. Therefore accused No.1 who was available for trial was tried and
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28675 CRL.P No. 2385 of 2026
acquitted of the offences. The reasons rendered by the concerned Court is as follows:
"10. Points No.1:- In order to prove the prosecution case, the prosecution have examined 3 witnesses as P.W.1 to 3 and got marked Ex.P.1 to 6 and got identified M.Os. 1 to 5. 11. C.W.1 Ramachandraiah the complainant examined as P.W.I. He deposed in his evidence that, as per the information received from C.W.5. on 02.05.2016 he along with panch witnesses C.W.2 and 3 and C.W.4 to 8 went near Sunkadakatte, Pillappana Katte, pipeline road 4-5 accused persons assembled and preparing to commit dacoity of public. He along with his staff went near the spot and conducted raid and secured the accused No.1 to 3. 2 accused persons are escaped from the spot. They have also seized knife from the possession of accused No.1, wooden club from the possession of Dinesh. They have also seized one iron long, two wooden club and two knives by conducting mahazar as per Ex.P.1. They produced the accused along with seized articles before C.W.9 along with his report as per Ex.P.2. In the cross examination he deposed only about securing of accused and seizure of M.O.1 to 5. 12. C.W.9 Jnanamurthy T.N. PSI examined as P.W.2. He deposed that on 02.05.2016 at about 4.15 p.m he received the Complaint as per Ex. P.2 and arrested the accused persons and also seized the materials produced by P.W.1. Based on the complaint he registered the FIR as per Ex.P.3. He has also recorded the voluntary statements of accused No.1 and 2. he has also deputed C.W.4 and 5 to secured accused No.3 to 5. He has also arrested the accused No.3 to 5 and recorded the voluntary statements. Thereafter he handed over the case file to C.W.10 for further investigation. His evidence is formal in nature. 13.
C.W.10 Harish M. PI examined as P.W.3. He deposed that on 06.07.2016 he received the case file from C.W.9 and completed the investigation and filed charge sheet against the accused persons. - 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28675 CRL.P No. 2385 of 2026
14. During the course of cross examination he denied all the suggestions put to him by the counsel for accused. His evidence is formal in nature. 15. The only evidence placed by the prosecution are of the police officials as P.W.1 to 3. No independent witnesses supported to the case of prosecution. The evidence of P.W.1 to 3 are formal one. The prosecution has failed to place corroborative evidence with regard to the seizure of M.O.1 to 5 and identity of accused. Absolutely there is no material evidence to prove that the accused persons had made preparation for committing dacoity and had assembled for the said purpose at vacant place near Sunkadakatte Pillappana Katte lake area within the jurisdiction of complainant Police Station. Accordingly the point No.1 is answered in the negative. 16. Point No.2:- In view of my findings on points No. 1, this court proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER Acting under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C., the accused No.1 is acquitted of the offences punishable under Section 399 and 402 of IPC. The M.Os. 1 to 5 are ordered to be retained in split up case against accused No.2, 3 and 5. The ball bond and surety bonds stands cancelled."
4. The reasons rendered by the concerned Court to acquit accused No.1 would undoubtedly become applicable to all other accused as the finding is that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt beyond all reasonable doubt and the resultant acquittal is on the score of no evidence. If there was no evidence qua accused No.1, it can hardly be said that on the
- 5 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28675 CRL.P No. 2385 of 2026
same evidence, the accused No.3 would get convicted if a trial is now permitted to be conducted. To save precious judicial time, I deem it appropriate to exercise jurisdiction under Sections 482 of Cr.P.C./Section 528 of BNSS and obliterate the split charge that is laid against the petitioner.
5. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
O R D E R [I] Criminal Petition is allowed. [II] Proceedings in S.C.No.969/2025 pending before the LVI Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City qua the petitioner stands quashed.
Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE
CBC List No.: 3 Sl No.: 34