- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18328 CRL.P No. 9865 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9865 OF 2024 BETWEEN: SHRI AMITH KUMAR S/O MANOHAR BAPNA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS (AS PER CHARGE SHEET) AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS (AS ON TODAY) R/O NO. 2, KAMADENU, VMS GARDEN, THINDLU MAIN ROAD, VIDYARANYAPURA, BENGALURU - 560 076. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DHARANESHA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY RAJANUKUNTE POLICE STATION, REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001. Digitally signed by SANJEEVINI J KARISHETTY Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18328 CRL.P No. 9865 of 2024 2. SMT MEENA W/O CHALUVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS (AS ON FIR DATE) AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS (AS ON TODAY) C/O CHALLAHALLI VILLAGE HESARAGATTA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK - 561 203. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.N. JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP FOR R1) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C. (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 29.09.2023 PASSED BY THE HONBLE JUDGE OF IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSION SCOURT, SITTING AT DODDABALLAPURA, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT IN THEIR S.C.NO.10029/2021 ARISING OUT OF THE CRIME NO.177/2018 OF THE RAJANUKUNTE P.S REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 397, 201, 114, 411 OF THE IPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18328 CRL.P No. 9865 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court calling in question proceedings in S.C.No.10029 of 2021 arising out of crime in Crime No.177 of 2018 registered for offences punishable under Sections 114, 201, 397 and 411 of the IPC. 2. Heard Sri Dharanesha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri B.N. Jagadeesha, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1. 3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows: - A complaint comes to be registered by the complainant/2nd respondent on 05-07-2018 against two unknown persons for offence punishable under Section 392 of the IPC in Crime No.177 of 2018. The allegation is that two unknown persons had snatched her 45 grams Mangalya chain and ran away on a motor cycle. The Investigating officer initially conducts investigation and files a ‘C’ report in the matter. Thereafter, continues investigation and arrests - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18328 CRL.P No. 9865 of 2024 accused Nos. 1 and 2 in some other case. When they were interrogated, it is said that they have rendered a statement and that at the instance of accused No.1, Ashok, the Investigating Officer recovers a gold chain weighing 21 grams. On 09-02-2021 a charge sheet comes to be filed against accused Nos. 1 and 2 for offences punishable under Sections 397 and 201 of the IPC. It is here the petitioner is also drawn as accused No.3 for the offence under Sections 411 and 114 of the IPC. Filing of the charge sheet is what has driven the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would vehemently contend that the Investigating Officer had initially filed a ‘C’ report. Voluntary statements of accused Nos.1 and 2 later has drawn the petitioner into the web of crime. For the statements of accused Nos. 1 and 2 there is no corroborative evidence against the petitioner. He would submit that Section 411 can be invoked, only if the petitioner has consciously received the stolen property. He would further contend that the complaint was with respect to 45 grams of Mangalya chain, but - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18328 CRL.P No. 9865 of 2024 the recovery is 21 grams of chain. Therefore, this discrepancy itself is enough for quashment of proceeding. 5. Per contra, the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor would vehemently refute the submissions in contending that the petitioner is a habitual purchaser of stolen property, not one but 6 cases are pending against him. Insofar as this case is concerned, there is recovery from the hands of the petitioner. Whether it is 21grams or 45 grams is a matter of evidence. He would seek dismissal of the petition. 6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the material on record. 7. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. A complaint comes to be registered on 05-07-2018. The gist of the complaint is as follows: “ಾಂಕ:05.07.2018 ರಂದು ಸಂೆ 5-00 ಗಂೆೆ ಾ ೕಮ ೕಾ ೋಂ ಚಲುವಾಜು ರವರು !ಾ"ೆೆ #ಾಜಾ$ %ೕ&ದ ದೂ'ನ )ಾಾಂಶ+ೇೆಂದೆ, ಾನು ,ೕಲ-ಂಡ /0ಾಸದ12 +ಾಸ+ಾ$ದು3, ನಮ4 ವ5ವ)ಾಯದ ಜೕನು ನಮ4 ಾಮಂದ ಸು7ಾರು ½ 8.ೕ. ದೂರದ12 ಾಡನೂರು ರ)ೆ9ಯ12 ಇದು3, ಾನು ಪನ ನಮ4 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18328 CRL.P No. 9865 of 2024 ಜೕ%%ಂದ ಹಸುಗ=ೆ ,ೕವನು> ತರು9ದು3, ಅದರಂAೆ ಈ ನ ಾಂಕ:05/07/2018 ರಂದು ಮDಾ5ಹ> ಸು7ಾರು 1-50 ಗಂೆಯ12, ಾನು ನಮ4 ಜೕ%%ಂದ ,ೕವನು> Aೆೆದುೊಂಡು ನಮ4 ಮೆಯ ಕEೆೆ ಬರು9ರು+ಾಗ ಚಲ2ಹ=G-ಾಡನೂರು ರ)ೆ9, ಪಕ-ದ12ನ Hಾಳ5ನವರ ಕೆJ ಹ9ರ ಾೋ ಇಬKರು ಅಪ'Lತ ವ589ಗಳM ಒಂದು ಕಪOP ಬಣRದ ಪ®ìS TೕಾS )ೈಕV ನ12 ಚಲ2ಹ=G, ಕEೆWಂದ ನನೆ ಎದುಾ$ ಬಂದು ನನ> ಹ9ರ ಬಂDಾಗ ಒಬK ವ589 TೕಾS )ೈಕV %ಂದ ೆಳೆ ಇ=ದು ನನ> YಂದುಗEೆWಂದ ಬಂದು ಒಂದು ಟವV %ಂದ ನನ> ಮುಖವನು> ಮುL\ ತನ> Tಣಾ1%ಂದ ನನ> #ೊೆJೆ ಗು3 ೆಳೆ- ]ೕ=^ದ, ಾನು 8ರುLೊಂEೆ. ಆಗ ಆತನ ಬ=Wದ3 ಒಂದು `ಾಕು Aೋ'^ ನನ> ೊರ=ನ12ದ3 ಸು7ಾರು 45 ಾಂ ತೂಕದ 7ಾಂಗಲ5 ಸ,ೕತ ಇರುವ 7ಾಂಗಲ5 ಸರವನು> ಬಲವಂತ+ಾ$ 8ತು9ೊಂಡು, 8ರುLೊಂಡೆ `ಾಕು/%ಂದ /ದು )ಾWಸುವODಾ$ aೆದ'^, ಸದ'ಯವರು ಬಂದ3 ಕಪOP ಬಣ5ದ TೕಾS )ೈಕV ನ12 #ೊರಟು #ೋ$ರುAಾ9ೆ. TೕಾS )ೈಕV ೆ ೊಂದb ಸಂcೆ5 ಇರ1ಲ2. ಸದ' ಇಬKರು ಆ)ಾಗಳM ಕನ>ಡ 7ಾತಾಡು9ದು3, ವಯಸುd ಸು7ಾರು 25 'ಂದ 35 ವಷದವಾ$ರುAಾ9ೆ. ಸದ' ವ589ಗಳನು> ೋ&ದೆ ಗುರುಸುAೆ9ೕೆ. ನಂತರ ಾನು ನಮ4 ಮೆಯವ'ೆ /`ಾರ =^ ಾಾನುಕುಂೆ ಆS.ೆ ಆಸPAೆಯ12 L8Aೆd ಪEೆದು !ಾ"ೆೆ ಬಂದು ದೂರು %ೕ&ರುAೆ9ೕೆ. ಆದ3'ಂದ ನನ> ಮುಖೆ- ಟವV ಮುL\ Tಣಾ1%ಂದ #ೊೆJೆ #ೊEೆದು `ಾಕ Aೋ'^ aೆದ'^ ನನ> ೊರ=ನ12ದ3 7ಾಂಗಲ5 ಸರವನು> 8ತು9ೊಂಡು #ೋ$ರುವ ಇಬKರು ಅಪ'Lತ ವ589ಗಳನು> ಪAೆ9 7ಾ& ನನ> 7ಾಂಗಲ5 ಸರವನು> ೊ&^ ಾನೂನು 'ೕಯ ಕಮ ಜರು$ಸaೇೆಂದು ೋರುAೆ9ೕೆ, 7ಾಂಗಲ5 ಸರದ ಅಂDಾಜು aೆfೆ ಸು7ಾರು 1 ಲg (ಒಂದು ಲg) ಆ$ರುAೆ9ೕಂAಾ ಇದ3 ದೂರನು> ಪEೆದು !ಾ"ಾ T.ಸಂ. 177/2018 ಕಲಂ:392 ಐ^ 'ೕAಾ5 ಪಕರಣ Dಾಖ1^ೊಂಡು ತ%cೆ ೈೊಂ&ರುAೆ9.” The Police conduct investigation and initially file a ‘C’ report, but later drawn in three accused. The petitioner is accused No.3. The summary of the charge sheet as obtaining in column No.17 reads as follows: “17. ೇ^ನ ಸಂiಪ9 )ಾಾಂಶ ಕಲಂ: 397, 114, 201, 411 ಐ^ ಾಂಕ: 05/07/2018 ರಂದು ಮkಾ5ಹ> 1:50 ಗಂೆಯ12 ಘನ ಾ5ಾಲಯದ +ಾ59ೆ )ೇ'ದ ಾಾನುಕುಂೆ m1ೕn !ಾ"ಾ ಸರಹದು3, ಯಲಹಂಕ Aಾfೋಕು, - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18328 CRL.P No. 9865 of 2024 #ೆಸರುಘಟJ #ೋಬ=, ಚಲ2ಹ=G, ಾಮಂದ ಾಡನೂರು ಾn ಕEೆೆ #ೋಗುವ ರ)ೆ9ಯ12 )ಾi-1 ರವರು ಅವರ ಜೕ%%ಂದ ,ೕವನು> Aೆೆದುೊಂಡು Hಾಳ5ನವರ ಕೆJ ಬ= ನEೆದುೊಂಡು ಬರು9Dಾ3ಗ ಈ Dೋoಾೋಪ"ಾ ಪpJ ಾಲಂ ನಂ: 12 ರ12, ಕಂಡ ಎ-1 ಮತು9 ಎ-2 ರವರು ಸರ ಸು1ೆ ಕೃತ5+ೆಸಗುವ ಸ7ಾನ ಉDೆ3ೕಶಂದ ಕಳGತನ 7ಾ&ದ3 ಪಲdS TೕಾS )ೈಕV.ನ12 ಬಂದು, TೕಾS )ೈಕV.ನ Yಂಬ ಕು=ದ3 ಎ-1 ರವರು TೕಾS )ೈಕV.%ಂದ ೆಳೆ ಇ=ದು Yಂsಾಗಂದ )ಾi-1 ರವರ ಮುಖವನು> ಟವV.%ಂದ ಮುL\ ತನ> Tಣಾ1%ಂದ )ಾi-1 ರವರ #ೊೆJೆ ಗು3 ]ೕ=^ `ಾಕು Aೋ'^ aೆದ'^ )ಾi-1 ರವರ ಕ9ನ12ದ3 Lನ>ದ 7ಾಂಗಲ5ದ ಸರವನು> 8ತು9ೊಂಡು ಆೋ-2 ರವರು %12^ೊಂ&ದ3 ಪಲdS TೕಾS )ೈಕV.ನ12 ಪಾ'ಾ$ #ೋಗು+ಾಗ ಸದ' Lನ>ದ ಸರದ12ದ3 7ಾಂಗಲ5ವನು> Dಾ' ಮDೆ5 8ತು9 ])ಾ&, Lನ>ದ ಸರವನು> ಆೋ -3 ರವರ ಬ= ಅಡ7ಾನ 7ಾ&ದು3, ಆೋ-3 ರವರು ತನ> ಮೆಯ12 #ಾಜS ಪ&^ದ 21 ಾಂ 210 1 ತೂಕದ Lನ>ದ ಸರವನು> ಅ7ಾನತು9ಪ&^ೊಂ&ದು3, ಎ1 ಮತು9 ಎ2 ರವರು Lನ>ದ ಸರ ಸು1ೆ 7ಾ&ದು3 ಎಂದು ೊ9ದ3ರೂ ಸಹ ಸದ' Lನ>ದ ಸರವನು> ಅಡ7ಾನ 7ಾ&ೊಂಡು, ಆೋಗ=ೆ ಎoೆJೕ ಸರ ಇದ3ರು ತರುವಂAೆ LAಾವ"ೆ 7ಾ&, ಸು1ೆ 7ಾ&ದ3 Lನ>ದ ಸರವನು> ^tೕಕ'^ರುAಾ9ೆಂದು #ಾಗೂ ಎ1 ಮತು9 ಎ2 ರವರು ಕೃತ5ೆ- ಇಂuv ಬದfಾವ"ೆ 7ಾ&ದ TೕಾS )ೈಕV ಅನು> ಉಪwೕ$^ ಮತು9 ಸು1ೆ 7ಾ&ದ3 Lನ>ದ ಸರದ12ನ 7ಾಂಗಲ5ವನು> 8ತು9 ])ಾ& )ಾxಾkಾರ ^ಗದಂAೆ ಾಶಪ&^ರುAಾ9ೆಂದು ಇದುವೆ/ೆ ನEೆ^ದ ತ%cೆWಂದ ದೃಢಪpJರುತ9Dೆ. ಆದ3'ಂದ, ,ೕಲ-ಂಡ ಕಲಂಗಳ 'ೕAಾ5 ಆೋಗಳ ,ೕfೆ #ೊ'ಸಲPಟJ ಈ Dೋoಾೋಪ"ಾ ಪpJ.” The contention of the petitioner that he is drawn into the web of crime on the voluntary statement of other accused and there is no other corroboration does not hold water. The only circumstance that is projected is that the weight of the gold chain which is complained of and the gold chain recovered, is totally different and, therefore, the petitioner is wrongly arrayed as an accused. This is a disputed fact that would - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18328 CRL.P No. 9865 of 2024 require evidence in the case at hand. The petitioner is alleged of offence punishable under Sections 411 and 114 of the IPC. The contention is that the petitioner did not have knowledge. The documents produced prove prima facie otherwise. Therefore, it is for the petitioner to come out clean in a full- blown trial. 8. Finding no merit in the petition, the petition stands rejected. Consequently, I.A.No.2 of 2024 also stands dismissed. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE BKP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8