The court determines that prior criminal history and possession of stolen goods provide a prima facie case against the accused, justifying the denial of bail.

ORDER

These two petitions are preferred under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. by accused Nos.1 and 3 respectively, to enlarge them on bail in a case registered at Kamakshipalya Police Station in crime No.422/2023 for the offence punishable under Section 397 of IPC.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned HCGP for the State and perused the material on record.

3. Petitioners along with another accused are alleged to have committed robbery on 07.08.2023 in the house of the complainant. It is alleged that at about 1.30 p.m. on 07.08.2023, when the complainant's son - Vijay was alone in the house, unknown persons approached him in the guise of making enquiry regarding the vacant house and barged into the house and threatening the complainant's son at knife point, snatched away three mobile phones and cash of Rs.7,000/-.

4. It is vehemently contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the entire allegations are false and the petitioners are innocent. It is contended that the alleged seizure of mobile phones from the petitioners is concocted and it is hard to believe that even when the accused are arrested after one week, they were in possession of the mobile phones. It is contended that the FIR is registered against unknown persons, alleging that only one person entered the house and therefore, the involvement of the petitioners is doubtful. It is also contended that after the arrest of the petitioners, they are implicated in false cases which were earlier registered against unknown persons. It is submitted that similarly placed accused No.2 has been granted anticipatory bail by the Sessions Court and therefore, the petitioners are also entitled for bail.

5. Learned HCGP has opposed the prayer seeking bail contending, the petitioners are habitual offenders involved in number of cases and in the present case, victim has identified them and the robbed mobile phones are also recovered from them. He has contended that, if the petitioners are enlarged on bail, they may once again involve in committing similar offences and they may flee from justice.

6. The complaint is lodged by one Kavitha, stating that she is working in one Sriranga Maruti garments and on 07.08.2023 at about 9.30 a.m. she went for work and her son - Vijay was alone in the house. Her son informed her over phone that at about 1.35 p.m. a person in the guise of making an enquiry about availability of the house on rent, barged into the house and showing the knife, robbed a Vivo company mobile phone, Lenovo company mobile phone and Techno company mobile phone as well cash of Rs.7,000/-.

7. In the complaint, it is clearly stated that the accused who entered the house was armed with a knife and the said accused threatened the complainant's son telling him that if he screams, he will be killed and two of his friends are waiting outside. He took the complainant's son near the gate where two more accused were sitting on a bike infront of the gate. Thereafter, all the three escaped on the said motor cycle. Hence, it is clear that three accused are involved in the robbery.

8. On 15.08.2023 both accused Nos.1 and 3 were apprehended and from their possession three mobile phones and a Suzuki Samurai motor cycle were recovered. From the possession of accused No.1, a button knife was also seized. The statement of complainant's son - C.W.8 has been recorded. He has identified both accused Nos.1 and 3.

9. Learned HCGP has furnished the list of cases in which accused Nos.1 and 3 are involved, which are as follows:

Accused No.1:

i. Kamakshipalya Police Station in crime No.422/2023 under Section 397 of IPC.

ii. Kamakshipalya Police Station in crime No.285/2023 under Section 379 of IPC.

iii