This successive bail petition is filed by the

petitioners/accused Nos.4 and 5 under Section 439 of

Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in Crime No.33/2021

registered by the Bagaluru Police Station (Sitting at

Devanahalli) for the offences punishable under Section

395 of IPC.

3

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners

and

Sri.

Vinayaka

V.

S.,

learned

High

Court

Government Pleader for the respondent-State.

3.

The case of the prosecution is that on the

complaint of one Nagarathnamma, the Police registered

a case for the aforesaid offence against unknown

persons on 16.02.2021 where it is alleged that when

she was walking along the road in front of Panchami

Hotel at 12.30 P.M., two unknown persons came and

snatched her Mangalya Chain weighing 17 grams worth

Rs.75,000/-. After registering the case, during the

investigation, the Police arrested these petitioners and

they have been remanded to judicial custody. The bail

petition of these petitioners came to be rejected by this

Court on 16.06.2021 in Crl.P.No.3539/2021. Hence,

the petitioners are before this Court in this successive

bail petition.

4

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits

that the petitioners are innocent and they have been

falsely implicated in the case. There is no recovery

from these petitioners. They are in custody from

16.02.2021 and in the other cases registered against

them by the Police, they have been granted bail by the

Magistrate and another case is pending for bail before

the Sessions Judge. They are ready to abide by the

conditions. The alleged offences are not punishable

with death or imprisonment for life. Hence, prayed for

grant of bail.

5.

Per contra, the learned HCGP appearing for

the State seriously objected the bail petition and

contended that there are 7 cases registered against

them and 2 cases were triable by the Sessions Judge

under Sections 395 and 397 of IPC. There are joint

recovery of 51 grams Golden Mangalyam, Mahindra

Jeep bearing Reg.No.AP-21-BJ-1574, the petitioners

5

are from Delhi and they have been granted bail, they

may flew away and hamper the trial. Hence, he prays

for dismissal of the bail petition.

6.

Having heard the learned counsel for the

parties and perused the records, this Court rejected the

bail petition on the last occasion. In this case, the

Police after completing the investigation have filed the

charge sheet where these petitioners and other

accused persons were involved in various cases.

Accused Nos.1 and 2 were involved in almost 26 cases

in different States including Delhi. These petitioners

were involved in Crime No.26/2021 registered by

Amruthalli Police Station for the offence punishable

under Section 392 of IPC, two cases in Crime

Nos.38/2021 and 39/2021 registered by Yelahanka

Police Station for the offence punishable under Section

392

of

IPC,

Crime

No.16/2021

registered

by

Devanahalli Police Station for the offence punishable

6

under Section 392 of IPC and one more case in Crime

No.36/2021 registered by Bagalur Police Station for the

offence punishable under Section 397 read with Section

34 of IPC. In this case, though the FIR was registered

for the offence under Section 392 read with Section 34

of IPC, during the investigation, it is revealed that

these petitioners are also involved in the crime and

they have been shown as accused Nos.4 and 5 in Crime

No.33/2021 which is now pending for trial before the

Sessions Judge for the alleged offence under Section

395 of IPC. It appears that the petitioners are habitual

offenders, who came from Delhi and committed similar

type of robbery and dacoity in Bengaluru and

surrounding areas. The alleged offences are serious in

nature. Though the Magistrate said to be granted bail

in other crimes for the offence punishable under

Section 392 of IPC but that is not the ground for

granting the bail to these petitioners for the offences

punishable under Sections 395 and 397 of IPC. If

7

these petitioners are granted bail, every possibility of

absconding fro