MR. K.S. ROHITH @ ONTE v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

ORDER The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order dated 31.05.2017 passed by the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City in S.C.No.700/2017, which is now merged in Special C.C.No.414/2017 for offences - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:22514 CRL.P No. 9819 of 2023 punishable under Sections 109, 120B, 399 and 402 of the IPC and Sections 25, 27 and 30 of the Arms Act, 1959 and further seeks quashment of entire charge sheet against the petitioner.

Heard Sri Sandesh J. Chouta, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Harish Ganapathi, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

Facts, in brief, germane are as follows: The petitioner gets embroiled in a Crime No.42/2017 for offences punishable under Sections 341, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC and remanded to Police custody for a period of 14 days till 5.00 p.m., on

21.02.2017. During the period when the petitioner was in Police custody in connection with Crime No.42/2017, a suo motu crime comes to be registered in Crime No.58/2017 for offences punishable under Sections 399 and 402 of the IPC and Sections 27 and 30 of the Arms Act, 1959 against eight accused named and unnamed. Since the petitioner was in Police custody, a body warrant was issued against the petitioner directing him to be present before the learned - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:22514 CRL.P No. 9819 of 2023 Magistrate. On 01.03.2017, the 2nd respondent, Investigating Officer files a requisition to cause physical production of the petitioner, A12 and A16. The petitioner is remanded to Police custody along with A12 and A16 for a period of 3 days in connection with the subject crime in Crime No.58/2017. All these proceedings were pending approval from the hands of the competent authority to invoke the provisions of the Karnataka Control of Organised Crimes Act, 2000 (‘the Act’ for short).

After approval is granted by the competent authority, permission is sought to carry out investigation under the Act and it was permitted by the learned Magistrate and Police custody of the petitioner, A12 and A18 was sought for a period of 4 days. On 07.04.2017, the petitioner and A12 are said to have rendered their signatures on blank papers while in custody. Challenging invocation of the provisions of the Act and approval granted for invoking the said Act, the petitioner approaches this Court in Writ Petition No.16771/2017. This Court, on 25.04.2017 grants an interim order of stay of investigation against the petitioner. It is then the charge sheet is filed before the concerned Court in Crime No.58/2017 barring the offences under the Act. The concerned Court on 31.05.2017 - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:22514 CRL.P No. 9819 of 2023 takes cognizance for the aforesaid offences. A supplementary charge sheet was also filed against several other accused for the aforesaid offences.

A coordinate Bench of this Court in terms of its order dated 08.06.2022 allows the writ petition, sets aside approval granted for invoking the provisions of the Act. Therefore, what remains now are the offences punishable under Sections 399 and 402 of the IPC read with the provisions of the Arms Act. Calling in question continuation of trial against the petitioner, the petitioner is before this Court in the subject petition.

The learned senior counsel Sri Sandesh J. Chouta, appearing for the petitioner would vehemently contend that the provisions under Sections 399 and 402 of the IPC read with Arms Act is what is alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner was not even present as he was in Police custody in the same Police Station concerning another crime. Since invocation of the Act is quashed, the reminder of the offences would require presence of the petitioner. He is dragged into the web of crime on the score that other accused have implicated the petitioner in the crime. Therefore, he is dragged - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC:22514 CRL.P No. 9819 of 2023 into the crime on voluntary statement of the co-accused. He would contend that it is impermissible in law. The confession statement made by co-accused cannot become the foundation for laying down a charge on any accused is his emphatic submission.

Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader would submit that the proceedings are at an advanced stage. Charge sheet is already filed. The petitioner has preferred the subject petition on 25th September, 2023. Therefore, this Court should not interfere at this stage. If the prosecution has no case, the petitioner would eventually get acquitted. That would not mean that the proceedings under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C should be entertained in favour of the petitioner.

The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. Two crimes emerge where the petitioner becomes an accused. The first one is registered on 08.02.2017 in Crime No.42/2017 for offences punishable under Sections 341, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC. He is remanded to Police custody for a period of 14 days, which would come to an end at 5.00 p.m. on

21.02.2017. The second one comes as a suo motu crime in - 7 - NC: 2024:KHC:22514 CRL.P No. 9819 of 2023 Crime No.58/2017 against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences. The offences punishable are under Sections 399 and 402 of the IPC read with Sections 27 and 30 of the Arms Act. Additionally, a communication was sent to the Competent Authority seeking permission to invoke Section 3 of the Act. The permission was granted. After grant of permission, the offences under the Act were also invoked against the petitioner and others. That comes to be challenged before this Court in Writ Petition No.16771/2017. This Court grants an interim order of stay of invocation of the provisions of the Act. Pending writ petition, charge sheet is filed against the petitioner and others in the said case for the offences under Sections 109, 120B, 399, 402 of the IPC and under Sections 25, 27 and 30 of the Arms Act. Cognizance is taken by the concerned Court against the petitioner, accused No.11. Accused Nos. 9 and 10 were dropped from the charge sheet as sufficient material to charge them was not available. A co-ordinate Bench of this Court in terms of its order dated 08.06.2023 allows Writ Petition No.16771/2017 partly setting aside the approval granted by the competent authority to invoke Section 3 of the - 8 - NC: 2024:KHC:22514 CRL.P No. 9819 of 2023 Act. The co-ordinate Bench qua the petitioner observes as follows: "ACCUSED NO.11 - MR. K S ROHIT KUMAR -Petitioner Cr.No. SC P/U/S Status Date Sl. No. 1. Docu- Ments 12 2 13 Police Station Electronic City Peenya

3. 14 Yelahanka 363/ 2007 276/ 2011 CRL. P.NO. 9648/ 2017 399, 402 Acquitted 19.02.2008 399, 402 Acquitted 22.12.2011 Quashed

13.06.2018 341, 504, 506 & 27, 30 of Arms Act

In that view of the matter, unless there is a specific material as to how the petitioner was a member of an organized crime syndicate and the basis of such a belief, the grant of prior approval under Section 24(1)(a) of the Act of 2000 is faulty and deserves to be interfered with. However, the respondent Nos.3 and 4 are entitled to furnish a fresh request for grant of approval under Section 24(1)(a) of the Act of 2000 by setting out reasons as to how the petitioner is treated as a member of an organized crime syndicate and as to the basis to proceed against him for an offence punishable under Section 3 of the Act of 2000. In view of the above, the petition is allowed in part and the Order dated 07.03.2017 passed by respondent No.1 granting prior approval under Section 24(1)(a) of the Karnataka Control of Organized Crime Act, 2000 is set aside. The Order dated 09.03.2017 passed by the Trial Court in Crime No.58/2017 permitting the insertion of Section 3 of the Act of 2000 against the petitioner is set aside.

3.00 p.m. in Crime No.58/2017. The gist of the crime is as follows: “ದೂ(cid:4)ನ (cid:6)ಾ(cid:8)ಾಂಶ(cid:11)ೇ(cid:14)ೆಂದ(cid:8)ೆ (cid:15)ಐ ಆದ (cid:14)ಾನು (cid:19)(cid:14)ಾಂಕ 19/02/2017 ರಂದು (cid:8)ಾ(cid:22)(cid:23) ಸು(cid:25)ಾರು 1-00 ಗಂ(cid:27)ೆಯ(cid:29)(cid:30) ೆಳ"#", $ಾ(cid:23)% ಬ# ’ಬ(ಂ(cid:19)ಗ)ೆ*ಂ(cid:19)+ೆ ಗ’,ನ(cid:29)(cid:30)ರುವ+ೆ., ನನ+ೆ ನಮ0 1ಾ2ಾ (cid:15)’ 10641 ಮು(cid:14)ೇಂದ(cid:23) ರವರು ನನ+ೆ 3ೕ4 (cid:25)ಾ5 ಯಲಹಂಕದ ಜೂ59ಯ: ;ೇಔ= ಕ>ೆ+ೆ ?ೋಗುವ @ಾAರಲ: ರ(cid:6)ೆ,ಯ ಪಕCದ(cid:29)(cid:30) Dಾ(cid:8)ೋ 8-10 ಜನರು ಮೂರು $ಾರುಗಳನುE F(cid:29)’$ೊಂಡು ಈ(cid:19)ನ (cid:8)ಾ(cid:22)(cid:23) ಜೂ59ಯ: ;ೇಔ= ಕ>ೆ+ೆ ?ೋಗುವ Dಾ(cid:8)ಾದರೂ ಹಣವಂತರನುE ಅಡLಗMN ಅವ(cid:4)+ೆ ;ಾಂO, Pಾಕು Qೋ(cid:4)’ ?ೆದ(cid:4)’ ಅವರ ಬ#Rರುವ SನEದ ಒಡ(cid:11)ೆಗಳU, ಹಣ ?ಾಗೂ ೆ;ೆ ಾಳವ ವಸು,ಗಳನುE VೋS$ೊಂಡು ಡ$ಾಯ(cid:22) (cid:25)ಾ>ೋಣ ಎಂದು (cid:25)ಾತ(cid:14)ಾ5$ೊಂಡು ?ೊಂಚು ?ಾY$ೊಂಡು ಕು#(cid:22)VಾZ(cid:8)ೆ ಎಂದು (cid:22)#’ದರು. ಆದZ(cid:4)ಂದ ’ಬ(ಂ(cid:19)ಗ)ೆ*ಂ(cid:19)+ೆ ?ೋ[ (cid:25)ಾ\(cid:22)ಯನುE ಖSತಪ5’$ೊಂಡು ಕ(cid:23)ಮ ಜರು[ಸಲು (cid:14)ಾನು ’ಬ(ಂ(cid:19)ಯವ(cid:8)ಾದ ?ೆ^.’ 5647 ರ_ೕ‘ 5.aೆ, ?ೆ^.’ 5541 ಉದಯಕು(cid:25)ಾc ?ೆ^.’ 5414 ರ_ೕ‘, (cid:15).’ 12150 ರವರನುE ಕ(cid:8)ೆದು$ೊಂಡು ?ಾಗೂ ಕೃಷf ಮತು, ಮುರು# ಎಂಬ ಪಂPಾR(cid:22)VಾರರನುE $ೋ[ಲು $ಾ(cid:23)% ಬ# ಬರ(cid:25)ಾ5$ೊಂಡು ಅವ(cid:4)+ೆ ನನ+ೆ (cid:25)ಾ\(cid:22)ಯನುE (cid:22)#’ ಅವರನುE aೊQೆಯ(cid:29)(cid:30) ಕ(cid:8)ೆದು$ೊಂಡು ನನE gೕ(cid:15)ನ(cid:29)(cid:30) ಮತು, ?ೊಯhಳ-162 ರ(cid:29)(cid:30),, ’ಬ(ಂ(cid:19)ಗಳನುE ?ಾಗೂ ಪಂPಾಯು,VಾರರನುE ಕು#"(cid:4)’ ಕ(cid:8)ೆದು$ೊಂಡು (cid:8)ಾ(cid:22)(cid:23) 1-30ಗಂ(cid:27)ೆ+ೆ ಜೂ59ಯ: ಕ>ೆ+ೆ ?ೋಗುವ @ಾAರಲ: ರ(cid:6)ೆ,ಯ ಬ(cid:19)+ೆ ?ೋ[ ಮ(cid:8)ೆಯ(cid:29)(cid:30). ಸು(cid:25)ಾರು 50-60 ಅ5 ದೂರದ(cid:29)(cid:30) (cid:11)ಾಹನಗಳನುE F(cid:29)(cid:30)’Vಾಗ (cid:15)’ 10641 ಮುFೕಂದ(cid:23) ರವರು ಸಹ ಅ(cid:29)(cid:30)+ೆ ಬಂದರು. (cid:14)ಾವiಗಳU ಇ#ದು (cid:14)ೋಡ;ಾ[ ಜೂA59ಯ: ;ೇಔ= ಕ>ೆ+ೆ ?ೋಗುವ @ಾAರಲ: ರ(cid:6)ೆ,ಯ ಪಕCದ(cid:29)(cid:30) ಜೂA5ೕ9ಯ: ;ೇಔ= ಕ>ೆ+ೆ ಮುಖ(cid:25)ಾ5$ೊಂಡು F(cid:29)(cid:30)’ದZ ಮೂರು $ಾರುಗಳ(cid:29)(cid:30) Dಾ(cid:8)ೋ 8-10 ಜನರು ಕು#ತು ಏ(cid:14)ೋ (cid:25)ಾತ(cid:14)ಾ5$ೊಳU"(cid:22),ದುZದು ಕಂ5ತು ತlಣ aೊQೆಯ(cid:29)(cid:30)ದZ ?ೆ^.’ 5647 - 11 - NC: 2024:KHC:22514 CRL.P No.

9819 of 2023 ¸ÀĪÀiÁgÀÄ (cid:8)ಾ(cid:22)(cid:23) ರ_ೕ‘ 5.aೆ ?ಾಗೂ ಪಂಚ(cid:8)ಾದ ಕೃಷf ಎಂಬುವರನುE ಅವರ ಹ(cid:22),ರ ?ೋ[ ಮ(cid:8)ೆಯ(cid:29)(cid:30) Fಂತು ಅವರನು (cid:25)ಾತ(cid:14)ಾ5$ೊಳU"(cid:22),VಾZ(cid:8)ೆಂಬುದನುE (cid:22)#ದು ಬರುವಂQೆ (cid:22)#’ ಕಳU\’ $ೊಡ;ಾRತು, ಸದ(cid:4)ಯವರು ಸು(cid:25)ಾರು 10 Fmಷಗಳ ನಂತರ \ಂ(cid:22)ರು[ ಬಂದು ಸು(cid:25)ಾರು 10 ಜನ ಆ(cid:6)ಾmಗಳU ಮೂರು $ಾ(cid:4)ಗಳ(cid:29)(cid:30), ಕು#ತು$ೊಂಡು ತಮ0 ಬ# (cid:15)ಸೂ,: ಮತು, Pಾಕು ಇಟುN$ೊಂಡು, M§âjUÉƧâgÀÄ F ¢£À F gÀ¸ÉÛAiÀÄ°è §gÀĪÀ ºÀಣವಂತರನುE ಅಡLಗMN ಅವ(cid:4)+ೆ (cid:15)ಸೂ,: ಮತು, >ಾ(cid:23)ಗ4 Qೋ(cid:4)’ ಅವರನುE ?ೆದ(cid:4)’ CªÀgÀ ಬ#Rರುವ SನEದ ಒಡ(cid:11)ೆಗಳU, ಹಣ ?ಾಗೂ ೆ;ೆ ಾಳUವ ವಸು,ಗಳನುE VೋS$ೊಂಡು ಡ$ಾಯ(cid:22) (cid:25)ಾ>ೋಣ ಎಂದು ªÀiÁvÀ£ÁrPÉƼÀÄîwÛzÁÝgÉ. JAzÀÄ w½¹zÀgÀÄ D¸Á«ÄUÀ¼ÀÄ qÀPÁAiÀÄw ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä ºÉÆÃAZÀÄ ºÁPÀÄwÛgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ ಧೃಢಪMNದZ(cid:4)ಂದ, 1-40 ಗಂ(cid:27)ೆ+ೆ ಸದ(cid:4)ಯವರುಗಳ ಸುತ, (cid:14)ಾನು ಮತು, ನನE aೊQೆಯ(cid:29)(cid:30)ದZ ’ಬ(ಂ(cid:19)ಯವರು ಸುತು,ವ(cid:8)ೆದು Vಾ# (cid:25)ಾ5ದುZ CªÀgÀÄUÀಳ(cid:29)(cid:30) $ೆಲವರು ತ(cid:15)q’$ೊಂಡು ಬ;ೋ(cid:8)ೋ $ಾ(cid:4)ನ(cid:29)(cid:30) ಓ5?ೋದರು, ಉ#ದ (cid:14)ಾಲುC ಜನ ಆ(cid:6)ಾmಗಳನುE \5ದು ತಂದು ನನE ಮುಂVೆ M¨ÉÆâಬ(ರ(cid:14)ಾE[ ?ಾಜರುಪ5’ದರು. ಆ (cid:14)ಾಲುC ಜನರ ?ೆಸರು t)ಾಸ $ೇಳ;ಾ[ 1) uಹ4 ಕು(cid:25)ಾc @ uೕಹನ @ ಡಬ(: mೕಟc uೕಹನ 2) (cid:14)ಾಗ(cid:8)ಾಜ @ tಲh4 +ಾಡv4 (cid:14)ಾಗ 3) gÁdÄ @ ಪಳF(cid:6)ಾwm 4) ಬಸವ(cid:8)ಾಜು 5) ಅx @ ಅx +ೌಡ ’Vಾ(cid:23)ಪiರ, 6) Pೇತು @ aಾಲಹ#", Pೇತು 7) ಪ(cid:23)$ಾ‘ @ ’Vಾzಪiರ 8) ªÀĺÉÃಶ ’Vಾzಪiರ 9) ಮತು, ಇತರರು ಎಂದು (cid:22)#’ದರು. ನಂತರ \5ದ ಆ(cid:6)ಾmಗಳನುE PÀÄ®APÀıÀªÁV tPಾ(cid:4)’Vಾಗ (cid:14)ಾವiಗಳU ಈ(cid:19)ನ ಈ ರ(cid:6)ೆ,ಯ(cid:29), ಒಂMDಾ[ ಓ>ಾಡುವ Dಾ(cid:8)ಾದರು ಹಣವಂತರನುE CqÀØಗMN ಅವ(cid:4)+ೆ ¦ಸೂ,: ಮತು, Pಾಕು Qೋ(cid:4)’ ?ೆದ(cid:4)’ ಅವರ ಹ(cid:22),ರ ಇರುವ SನEದ ಒಡ(cid:11)ೆ, ಹಣ ?ಾಗೂ ೆ;ೆ ಾಳUವ ವಸು,ಗಳನುE Yತು,$ೊಂಡು ಡ$ಾಯ(cid:22) (cid:25)ಾ>ೋಣ ಎಂದು (cid:25)ಾತ(cid:14)ಾ5$ೊಂಡು ?ೊಂಚು ?ಾY$ೊಂಡು (cid:14)ಾವi ತಂ(cid:19)ದZ ಮೂರು $ಾರುಗಳನುE F(cid:29)(cid:30)’$ೊಂಡು ಕು#(cid:22),VೆZವi ಎಂದು (cid:22)#’ವರು ಸದ(cid:4)ಯವರು ಒಂMDಾ[ ಓ>ಾಡುವ (cid:6)ಾವvಜFಕರನುE ಆಡಗMN ಡ$ಾಯ(cid:22) (cid:25)ಾಡಲು ?ೊಂಚು?ಾಕು(cid:22),zÀÄÝzÀÄ ದೃಢ(cid:11)ಾದZ(cid:4)ಂದ ¸ÀzÀjಯವರನುE ವಶ$ೆC Qೆ+ೆದು$ೊಂಡು ಮುಂ(cid:19)ನ ಕ(cid:23)ಮದ ಬ+ೆ., aೊQೆಯ(cid:29)zÀÝ ಪಂಚರ ಸಮlಮದ(cid:29), tವರ(cid:11)ಾದ ಪಂಚ(cid:14)ಾ_ಯನುE ಬ(cid:8)ೆದು ಆ(cid:8)ೋ(cid:15)ತರು ಡ$ಾR(cid:22) (cid:25)ಾಡಲು ತಂ(cid:19)ದZ $ಾರುಗಳ(cid:29)(cid:30) ¸ÀܼÀzÀ°è Vೊ(cid:8)ೆತ ಒಂದು (cid:11)ಾAಗEc $ಾರು ಮತು, ಒಂದು ?ೊಂqÉÊ ವಣv ಎಂಬ $ಾರುಗಳನುE ಮತು, ತಮ0 ಬ#RಟುN$ೊಂ5ದZ, ಒಂದು ಕಂM(cid:23)_ೕ{ (cid:15)ಸೂ,ಲು ಮತು, 6 gೕವಂತ ಗುಂಡುಗಳನುE ಮತು, ಒಂದು Pಾಕು, JgÀqÀÄ ಕಪiq ಬಣfದ ಜಕc4, ಒಂದು aೊQೆ ಶ|, ಒಂದು ?ೆ¯ÉäÃ=, ಸು(cid:25)ಾರು ಎರಡುವ(cid:8)ೆ ಅ5 - 12 - NC: 2024:KHC:22514 CRL.P No.

9819 of 2023 ಇರುವ ¨ÉvÀÛzÀ Vೊ2ೆf ಮತು, ಕಪiq ಬಣfದ ಒಂದು ®UÉÎÃeï ಾAಗನುE ಅ(cid:25)ಾನತು, ಪ5’$ೊಂಡು ?ಾಗು ದ¸ÀÛ[(cid:4) (cid:25)ಾ5ದ 4 ಜನ ಆ(cid:8)ೋ(cid:15)ಗಳ ಸ_ೕತ (cid:19)(cid:14)ಾಂಕ : 20/02/2017 gÀAzÀÄ ¨É½UÉÎ 03-00 UÀAmÉUÉ »AwgÀÄV EªÀgÀÄUÀ¼À «gÀÄzÀÞ PÀ®A 399, 402, L¦¹ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 27, 30, DªÀÄìgï DPïÖ jÃvÁå PÉøÀÄ zÁR°¹gÀÄvÉÛÃ£É EvÁå¢.” Where was the petitioner at juncture is necessary to be noticed. He was in the Police custody in the very same Police Station pursuant to an order of the concerned Court in Crime No.42/2017. This is an undisputed fact as body warrant is granted by the concerned Court to produce the petitioner who was in custody in the other crime. Therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner was either a part of preparation or assembly for the purpose of commissioning of dacoity. How did not petitioner come into the picture is not on any investigation but on a suo motu statement of the co-accused which is not in dispute as could be gathered from the charge sheet so filed by the Police, which reads as follows: “ಅಂಕಣ-3 ರ(cid:29)(cid:30) ನಮೂ(cid:19)’ರುವ ಎ-1, ಎ2, ಮತು, ಎ-11 ?ಾಗೂ ಎ12 ರವರು ವAವ’}ತ(cid:11)ಾ[ ತಮ0 ಅಕ(cid:23)ಮ ;ಾಭ$ಾC[ ಹಲವi ವಷvಗ#ಂದ $ೊ;ೆ, ಸು(cid:29)+ೆ ಮಂQಾದ ಅಪ(cid:8)ಾಧ ಚಟುವM$ೆಗಳ(cid:29)(cid:30) Qೊಡ[’$ೊಂಡು ಹಲವi ಸಲ aೈಲು(cid:11)ಾಸ ಕೂಡ ಅನುಭt’ರುವ Pಾ#(cid:128)ದZ ಆ(cid:8)ೋ(cid:15)ಗ)ಾ[ದುZ ಮತು, ಒಬ((cid:4)+ೊಬ((cid:4)+ೆ ಪ(cid:4)ಚಯ ಇದZ(cid:4)ಂದ ಎ-1 ಮತು, ಎ-2 ರವರು ಎ11 ಮತು, ಎ12 ರವ(cid:8)ೊಂ(cid:19)+ೆ Fರಂತರ ಸಂಪಕvದ(cid:29)(cid:30)ದುZ$ೊಂಡು (cid:19)(cid:14)ಾಂಕ 20.02.2017$ೆC \ಂVೆ ಹಲವi ಸಲ $ೊ5+ೆಹ#" 3(cid:29)ೕ% 1ಾ2ೆ (cid:11)ಾA(cid:15),ಯ (cid:6)ಾw(cid:22) +ಾಡv4 - 13 - NC: 2024:KHC:22514 CRL.P No.

9819 of 2023 ?ೋಟ: ಬ# ಆ+ಾ+ೆ. ಅವರನುE ಸಂಪYv’ ತಮ+ೆ ಮ(cid:129) ಎಂಬುವವFಂದ @ಾ(cid:23)ಣ ಭಯ ಇರುವ ಬ+ೆ. ಎ-11 ಮತು, ಎ12 ರವರ ಬ# ?ೇ#$ೊಂ>ಾಗ ಸದ(cid:4) 11 ಮತು, ಎ12 ಆ(cid:8)ೋ(cid:15)ತರು ಮ(cid:129)ಯನುE ಮು[ಸುವ ಬ+ೆ. ಸಲ?ೆ Fೕಡುವiದರ aೊQೆ+ೆ CªÀgÉÆÃA¢UÉ ಒಳಸಂಚು ನ>ೆ’ ತಮ0 ಎ8 ಕmmïìªÉÄA= ಗ#+ಾ[ ದ(cid:8)ೋ>ೆ (cid:25)ಾ5Dಾದರು ಸ(cid:4) ಹಣ (cid:25)ಾ5$ೊಡುವಂQೆ ಪ(cid:23)Pೋದ(cid:14)ೆ ಮತು, ಕುಮ0ಕುC Fೕ5ದZ(cid:4)ಂದ ಎ-1 ಮತು, ಎ-2 ರವರು ಎ11 ಮತು, ಎ12 ರವ(cid:4)+ೆ ಹಣ (cid:25)ಾ5$ೊಡುವ GzÉÝñÀ¢AzÀ ?ಾಗೂ ತಮ0 Cಕ(cid:23)ಮ ;ಾಭ$ಾC[ ತಮ0 ¸ÀºÀZÀgÀgÁzÀ ಎ3 (cid:4)ಂದ ಎ-8 ಮತು, J-13 jAzÀ J-15 ರವ(cid:8)ೊಂ(cid:19)+ೆ (cid:19)(cid:14)ಾಂಕ 19/20.02.2017 gÀAzÀÄ ಮಧA(cid:8)ಾ(cid:22)(cid:23) ಸು(cid:25)ಾರು 1.40 ಗಂ(cid:27)ೆಯ(cid:29)(cid:30) 2 PÁgÀÄ 1 gೕಪi, ಶ(cid:6)ಾ(cid:130)ಸ(cid:130), ಗುಂಡುಗಳU ಮತು, EvÀgÉ ಆಯುಧಗ)ೆ*ಂ(cid:19)+ೆ ಇVೆ ೆಂಗಳ*ರು ನಗರ AiÀÄ®ºÀAPÀ 3(cid:29)ೕ% 1ಾ2ೆ (cid:11)ಾA(cid:15),ಯ ಜು5(cid:131)ಯ: ಬ>ಾವ2ೆಯ @ಾAರಲ: ರ(cid:6)ೆ,ಯ(cid:29)(cid:30) (cid:6)ೇ(cid:4) ಆ (cid:25)ಾಗv(cid:11)ಾ[ ಓ>ಾಡುವಂತ (cid:6)ಾವvಜFಕ ವAY,ಗಳನುE (cid:25)ಾಡುವ ಉVೆZೕಶ(cid:19)ಂದ qÀgÉÆÃqÉAiÀÄ ¹zÀÝvÉAiÀÄ°ègÀĪÁUÀ ¸ÁQë-1 gÀªÀjUÉ zÉÆgÉvÀ ವತv(cid:25)ಾನದ _ೕ(cid:8)ೆ+ೆ ಅವರು (cid:6)ಾ(cid:132) 2, 3 ಮತು, ತಮ0 ’ಬ(ಂ(cid:19)ಯವ(cid:8)ಾದ (cid:6)ಾ(cid:132) 4 (cid:4)ಂದ 9 gÀªÀgÉÆA¢UÉ J-5 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-8 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-13 jAzÀ J-15 gÀªÀgÀÄ vÀ¦à¹PÉÆÃAqÀÄ vÁªÀÅ vÀA¢zÀÝ gೕ(cid:15)(cid:14)ೊಂ(cid:19)+ೆ ¥À(cid:8)ಾ(cid:4)Dಾ[ದುZ, ಘಟ(cid:14)ಾ ಸ}ಳದ(cid:29)(cid:30) ’YCದ ಎ1 (cid:4)ಂದ ಎ4 ರವರನುE ಬಂ(cid:19)’ CªÀgÀÄUÀ¼À ªÀ±ÀzÀ°èzÀÝ $ಾರುಗಳU, 1 ಕಂM(cid:23)_ೕ{ ¦¸ÀÆÛ¯ï, 6 fêÀAvÀ ಗುಂಡುಗಳU, 1 Pಾಕು ಮತು, EvÀgÉ ಆಯುಧ ?ಾಗೂ ವಸು,ಗಳನುE ವಶಪ5’ (cid:25)ಾಲುಪMN ಸಂ(cid:135)ೆA 15/2017ರ(cid:29)(cid:30) ಅಳವ5’$ೊಂ5ರುವiದು ನಂತರದ ತF(cid:135)ೆಯ(cid:29)(cid:30) ಘಟ(cid:14)ಾ ಸ}ಳ(cid:19)ಂದ ಓ5 ºÉÆÃzÀ J5 jAzÀ J8 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J13 jAzÀ J15 gÀªÀgÀ£ÀÄß ¢£ÁAPÀ 26.02.2017 gÀAzÀÄ §A¢¹ CªÀgÀÄ PÀÈvÀåPÉÌ §¼À¹zÀ ¨É¯ÉÆÃgÀ fÃ¥À£ÀÄß ¸ÀºÀ ªÀ±À¥Àr¹ ªÀiÁ®Ä ¥ÀnÖ ¸ÀASÉå 16/2017 gÀ°è C¼ÀªÀr¹PÉÆArgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ. J-1 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J-2 DgÉÆævÀgÀÄ PÀæªÀĪÁV gÁªÀÄ£ÀUÀgÀ ¥Éưøï oÁuÉ ªÉÆ.¸ÀA.34/2015 PÀ®A 302 gÉ/« 149 L¦¹ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÉÊmï¦üïïØ ¥Éưøï oÁuÉ ªÉÆ.¸ÀA.70/2016 gÀ°è 120©, 302,201 (cid:8)ೆt 34 ಐ¦’ ಪ(cid:23)ಕರಣದ(cid:29)(cid:30) ೆಂಗಳ*ರು $ೇಂದ(cid:23) $ಾ(cid:8)ಾಗೃಹದ(cid:29)(cid:30)ರು(cid:11)ಾಗ ಅವ(cid:4)+ೆ ಎ;ೆ$ಾ(cid:145)F(cid:146)h ’M 3(cid:29)ೕ% 1ಾ2ೆ u.ಸಂ.233/2016 ಕಲಂ 143, 147,148, 307, 302 (cid:8)ೆ/t 149 ಐ¦¹ ಪ(cid:23)ಕರಣದ(cid:29)(cid:30) ಅVೇ aೈ(cid:29)ನ(cid:29)(cid:30)ದZ ಎ-16 ಆ(cid:8)ೋ(cid:15)ಯ ಪ(cid:4)ಚಯ(cid:11)ಾ[ ಅವನ ಬ# ಎ-1 ಮತು, ಎ-2 ರವರು ತಮ0 ಅಪ(cid:8)ಾಧ ಕೃತAಗಳU ಮತು, ತಮ[ರುವ @ಾ(cid:23)ಣ xೕ(cid:22)ಯ §UÉÎ ºÉýPÉÆAqÁUÀ, ¸ÀzÀj J16 DgÉÆæAiÀÄÄ CªÀgÉÆA¢UÉ M¼À¸ÀAZÀÄ £Àqɹ CªÀgÀ C¥ÀgÁzsÀ PÀÈvÀåUÀ½UÉ ¸ÀºÀPÀj¸ÀĪÀ GzÉÝñÀ¢AzÀ DvÀ£À£ÀÄß £ÉÆÃqÀ®Ä §AUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ - 14 - NC: 2024:KHC:22514 CRL.P No.

9819 of 2023 PÉÃAzÀæ PÁgÁUÀȺÀPÉÌ ¨sÉÃn PÉÆqÀÄwÛzÀÝ J-18 ಆ(cid:8)ೋ(cid:15)ಯ ಮೂಲಕ ಎ-20 (cid:8)ೋ(cid:15)+ೆ (cid:25)ಾಲು ಪMNಸಂ(cid:135)ೆA 22/2017ರ(cid:29)(cid:30) ಆಳವ5’$ೊಂ5ರುವ ಶ(cid:6)ಾ(cid:130)ಸ(cid:130) ಮತು, ಗುಂಡುಗಳನುE ಸರಬ(cid:8)ಾಜು (cid:25)ಾ5’ರುವiದು.” The petitioner is dragged into the web of crime admittedly on account of voluntary/confession statement of the co-accused. This is what is held by the Apex Court to be impermissible in law.

The Apex Court in the case of DIPAKBHAI JAGDISHCHANDRA PATEL v. STATE OF GUJARAT1 has held as follows: “46. In CBI v. V.C. Shukla [CBI v. V.C. Shukla, (1998) 3 SCC 410: 1998 SCC (Cri) 761: AIR 1998 SC 1406], a Bench of three learned Judges, after approving Pakala Narayana Swami [Pakala Narayana Swami v. King Emperor, 1939 SCC OnLine PC 1 (1938-39) 66 IA 66: AIR 1939 PC 47], had occasion to consider the distinction between confession and admission. This Court went on to hold as follows: (V.C. Shukla case [CBI v. V.C. Shukla, (1998) 3 SCC 410: 1998 SCC (Cri) 761: AIR 1998 SC 1406], SCC pp. 437-38, para 45) “45. It is thus seen that only voluntary and direct acknowledgement of guilt is a confession but when a confession falls short of actual admission of guilt it may nevertheless be used as evidence against the person who made it or his authorised agent as an “admission” under Section 21. The law 1 (2019) 16 SCC 547 - 15 - NC: 2024:KHC:22514 CRL.P No.

Section 21 of the Evidence Act provides as follows:

21. Proof of admissions against persons making them, and by or on their behalf.— Admissions are relevant and may be proved as against the person who makes them, or his representative in interest; but they cannot be proved by or on behalf of the person who makes them or by his representative in interest, except in the following cases— (1) An admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person making it, when it is of such a nature that, if the person making it were dead, it would be relevant as between third persons under Section 32. (2) An admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person making it, when it consists of a statement of the existence of any state of mind or body, relevant or in issue, made at or about the time when such state of mind or body existed, and is accompanied by conduct rendering its falsehood improbable. (3) An admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person making it, if it is relevant otherwise than as an admission.

Thus, what amounts to an admission can be used against the maker of the admission or his representative in interest. As to what constitutes an admission is to be found in Section 17 of the Evidence Act, which defines “admission” as follows:

17. Admission defined.—An admission is a statement, oral or documentary or contained in - 17 - NC: 2024:KHC:22514 CRL.P No. 9819 of 2023 electronic form, which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact, and which is made by any of the persons, and under the circumstances, hereinafter mentioned.

In Bharat Singh v. Bhagirathi [Bharat Singh v. Bhagirathi, AIR 1966 SC 405], the true nature of the evidentiary value of admission, and whether without confronting the maker of the admission, it could be used, has been referred to and this is what this Court had to say: (AIR p. 410, para 19) against “19. Admissions have to be clear if they are the person making to be used them. Admissions are substantive evidence by themselves, in view of Sections 17 and 21 of the Indian Evidence Act, though they are not conclusive proof of the matters admitted. We are of opinion that the admissions duly proved are admissible evidence irrespective of whether the party making them appeared in the witness box or not and whether that party when appearing as witness was confronted with those statements in case it made a statement contrary to those admissions. The purpose of contradicting the witness under Section 145 of the Evidence Act is very much different from the purpose of proving the admission.

For the aforesaid reasons, the following: