ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI)

This petition is filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail in Crime no.139/2024 by Mudalgi Police Station for offences punishable under Section 310 (2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’, for short) by accused no.1 to 3.

2. Sri Ashok R. Kalyanshetty, learned counsel for petitioner submitted case of prosecution was that at 11.20 p.m. on 20.11.2024, complaint was filed by Jaffar Ibrahim Mujawar (‘complainant’ for short), stating that he was running wholesale Grocery shop at Terdal, wherein he supplied grocery on credit basis, and collected payment later through his employees. On 20.11.2024, his employees namely Sanju Kalappa Kuhalli and Isharar Ismail Mujawar were sent to collect credit amount, Azharuddin - his nephew informed him about his workers being robbed. After contacting his employees, they confirmed that Rs.12,00,000/- kept in bag was robbed near Harugeri cross on Nippani – Mudhol road, at 3:00 p.m. on 20.11.2024 by four unknown persons who came on two motorcycles, threw chilli powder and showing iron rod to threaten victims to hand over money. Said complaint was registered as Crime no.139/2024 at Mudalgi Police Station against four unknown persons.

3. It was submitted, petitioners were employed at Ichalakaranji, petitioner no.1 (accused no.1) as Management Supervisor at J Kazzie Constructions, petitioner no.2 (accused no.2) as Welder and Gas cutter at Raj Engineers and petitioner no.3 (accused no.3) as Grinding – Fitting Helper at Raj Engineers. They were permanent residents along with their families who were dependent on them. They were arrested on 27.11.2024 and had been in custody since. It was further submitted prosecution had completed investigation and filed charge sheet on 02.01.2025 in (C.C.no.30/2025).

4. It was submitted, there were no specific overt-acts against each of petitioners, except vague allegations in common against four unknown persons. It was submitted, absence of any description of features of alleged four assailants, motorcycles they used, clothed they had worn or particulars about bag in which money was being carried etc.

would give rise to grave doubts about prosecution version. It was further submitted, amount taken away by accused was alleged to be Rs.12,00,000/- in complaint, amount recovered from accused and amount alleged to have been spent by them would not total to said amount.

5. It was further submitted, in spot panchanama drawn, there was neither any recovery nor even mention of any chilli powder strewn on ground or on clothes of CWs.5 and 6. Even recovery of money was being relied upon, there was no recovery of bag in which cash was being carried by CWs.5 and 6. It was also submitted without any criminal antecedents petitioners were implicated. On above grounds sought for allowing petition.

6. On other hand, Sri Jairam Siddi, learned HCGP for respondent - State opposed petition. At outset it was submitted offence alleged against petitioners was dacoity which was serious offence. It was submitted, though complaint and FIR were against four unknown persons, during investigation, there was recovery of more than Rs.8,00,000/- from accused. It was submitted, fact that petitioners were from another State aggravated claim for bail. It was submitted in case of grant of bail, there was likelihood of petitioners fleeing away, apart from possibility of tampering with prosecution witnesses. Therefore there were no good grounds for granting bail.

7. Heard learned counsel.

8. Only point that arises for consideration herein is:

“Whether petitioner is entitled for regular bail with conditions?”

9. This petition for regular bail is by accused no.1 to 3 for offences alleged in Crime no.139/2024 by Mudalgi Police Station for offence under Section 310 (2) of BNS i.e. dacoity punishable with imprisonment for life, which would be heinous offence.

10. As per prosecution, incident occ