Criminal Petition No. 8957 of 2024 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4312 CRL.P No. 8957 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8957 OF 2024 (439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS)) BETWEEN: HUSSAIN, S/O. LATE SHAMSHEER, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT LASANI GRAMA, DILVARA PHASE, DEVAARA TALUK, AJMEER DISTRICT, RAJASTHAN STATE - 305 001. (BY SRI. RAKSHITH R, ADVOCATE) AND: Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BYADARAHALLI PS, REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 560 001. …PETITIONER …RESPONDENT
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI. RANGASWAMY R, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 (FILED U/S.483 BNNS) OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.841/2023 OF BYADARAHALLI POLICE STATION PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU RURAL IN S.C.NO.89/2024 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4312 CRL.P No. 8957 of 2024 FOR THE OFFENCE P/US/ 395, 307, 120B R/W SEC.34 OF IPC AND SEC.25(1-A), 7 OF ARMS ACT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER This petition seeking bail is preferred by accused No.3, praying to enlarge him on bail in Crime No.841/2023 of Byadarahalli Police Station, Bengaluru City, registered for offences punishable under Section 392, 397, 307 read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 25(1A), 7 of the Arms Act, 1959. 2. FIR is registered against 4 un-known persons on a complaint lodged by one Sri. Rajendra Kumar S/o. Poolchand. On completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed against accused Nos.1 to 7 for offences punishable under Section 395, 307, 120-B of IPC, and Section 25(1A) read with Section 7 of the Arms Act. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4312 CRL.P No. 8957 of 2024 3. Brief facts of the case are that, first informant Rajendra Kumar is working in one Vinayaka jewellers, situated at Magadi Main Road, Doddagollarahatti, Bengaluru for the past one and half years. On 12.10.2023, at about 10:30 a.m., when he was in the shop along with one Manoj kumar Lohar, two un-known persons came to the shop in the guise of purchasing gold rings. When he was showing gold rings to the said two persons, two more persons entered the shop. They closed the shutter and one of them showed a pistol and threatened them to give the gold jewellaries. When they objected, one of the accused took away the gold necklace, gold rings, gold bracelets, gold chains, gold matis, gold earrings in all about 500 grams of gold from the show-case. When Manoj Kumar Lohar tried to catch the accused, the accused, who was holding the pistol fired at his left thigh and attempted to kill him. Thereafter, all the four accused fled away with gold articles worth about Rs.30,00,000/-. 4. Petitioner came to be arrested on 14.10.2023. At his instance about 278 grams of gold articles and a - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4312 CRL.P No. 8957 of 2024 knife are recovered. In the charge sheet he is arraigned as accused No.3. His prayer for bail has been rejected by the learned Sessions Judge in Crl.Misc.No.1726/2024, vide order dated 21.08.2024. 5. Learned Sessions Judge has observed that already 278 grams of gold ornaments are recovered from accused No.3 and also a knife, used for the commission of offence. Offences alleged are very heinous in nature and the grounds on which accused Nos.6 and 7 were released on bail are not available to the present petitioner, as knife and huge quantity of gold ornaments are recovered at his instance. Non conducting of test identification parade and non speaking anything about the knife by the complainant etc., can be adjudicated only after a full fledged trial and not at this stage. 6. Learned counsel for petitioner has vehemently contended as under: The incident took place on 12.10.2023. FIR is registered against un-known persons. Except mentioning - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:4312 CRL.P No. 8957 of 2024 the approximate age of the accused, there is no description of the accused given in the FIR. Recovery according to prosecution was effected on 14.10.2023, but till 21.12.2023, recovery was not reported to the learned Magistrate. There is no mention of accused armed with a knife, whereas a knife is alleged to be recovered from the accused, said to have been used in the commission of offence. Therefore, alleged recovery of gold articles and knife is not believable. As per complainant, about half kg of gold was robbed by the accused persons, whereas in the charge sheet, it is stated that gold articles weighing about 798 grams was taken away by the accused in two bags. The description of the gold articles are also not mentioned in the FIR. The petitioner is a stranger and there is no test identification parade conducted after his arrest, though there are two witnesses, who have seen the accused persons. He further conducted that accused No.6 has been enlarged on bail by the learned Sessions Judge and accused No.7 is enlarged on bail by this Court and - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:4312 CRL.P No. 8957 of 2024 therefore, the petitioner is also entitled for the relief of bail. He has accordingly, sought to allow the petition. 7. Learned High Court Government Pleader has filed statement of objections. He has contended that huge quantity of gold articles have been recovered from the present petitioner and those gold articles have been identified by the complainant. Further, accused is also identified by the complainant as the one who committed robbery. 8. Learned High Court Government Pleader further contended that petitioner is a habitual offender involved in 4 more cases. He hails from the State of Rajasthan and therefore, if he is released on bail, chances of committing similar offence and fleeing from justice are not ruled out. He contended that in view of the nature of offence committed, petitioner is not entitled for bail. Accordingly, he has sought to dismiss the petition. 9. The incident took place on 12.10.2023 at about 10:30 to 11:00 a.m. The accused have entered the - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:4312 CRL.P No. 8957 of 2024 jewellery shop where the complainant was working and committed robbery in a broad day light and took away huge quantity of gold ornaments. In the complaint, it is alleged that one of the accused was armed with a pistol and he fired a shot at Manoj Kumar Lohar and caused injuries to his thigh. The statement of injured Manoj Kumar Lohar was recorded on 17.10.2023. As per wound certificate, he has sustained gun shoot injury to left thigh with entry wound and no exit wound with a bullet track over left thigh. The said injury is stated to be grievous in nature. 10. From the petitioner herein, the following gold articles are recovered: i) 65 grams of 28 gold rings; ii) 22 grams of 5 gold chain; iii) 17 grams of 5 gold mati; iv) 29 grams of 3 gold jumki; v) 71 grams of 40 gold fancie hangings; vi) 61 grams of 38 gold ear-rings; and - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:4312 CRL.P No. 8957 of 2024 vii) 13 grams of 8 gold studs; 11. It is the contention of the learned counsel for petitioner that there is no mention of accused using a knife in the FIR, whereas, a knife is recovered from the petitioner and therefore, the recovery cannot be believed. 12. Merely because there is no mention of accused using a knife, at this stage, that itself is not a ground to disbelieve the case of prosecution. The petitioner was arrested within 3 days from the date of incident. Huge quantity of gold articles have been recovered at his instance and the said gold articles are identified by the first informant. 13. The learned High Court Government Pleader has furnished the details of cases in which the petitioner is involved which are as under: 1. Crime No.341/2022 of Tavarekere Police Station; 2. Crime No.293/2019 of Matavada Police Station. 14. Both are registered for the offence punishable under Section 380 of IPC. It is also stated that the - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:4312 CRL.P No. 8957 of 2024 petitioner is an accused in cases registered at Intezargunj Police Station and Pondichery Police Station. 15. Grant of bail to accused Nos.6 and 7 is not a ground to enlarge the petitioner on bail as the ground of parity is not available to him. From the said accused there is no recovery of gold articles. Further, petitioner hails from the State of Rajasthan. He has criminal antecedents. As rightly contended by the learned High Court Government Pleader, if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there are chances of fleeing away from justice and committing similar offences. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence, this is not a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the following:-
Decision
ORDER i) Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE LDC: List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23