This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.4 and 5

under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

(hereinafter for brevity referred to as ‘Cr.P.C’) for granting bail in

Crime No.50/2021 registered by the Kaladagi Police, Bagalkot Rural

Circle for the offence punishable under Sections 397 of the Indian

Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as ‘IPC’) and

subsequently charge-sheet has been filed for the offences

punishable under Sections 397, 120B, 212 and 412 read with

Section 34 of IPC.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the

learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent/State.

3.

The case of the prosecution is that, on the complaint by

one Devidas Gananath Chikkaramane filed a complaint on

3

04.04.2021 alleging that on 03.08.2021, when himself and his wife

were sleeping in his house, at about 01:30 am on 04.08.2021,

accused Nos.1 to 3 came into the house by breaking open the door

and robbed the gold ornaments worth `3,56,000/- by assaulting

them and causing injuries and also robbed cash of `10,000/- and

went away. After registering the case, the police arrested these

petitioners and others on 02.11.2021 and they were remanded to

the judicial custody. Their bail petition came to be rejected by

District Judge. Hence, they are before this Court.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the

petitioners are innocent of the alleged offences and they have been

falsely implicated in the case only on the basis of the voluntary

statement of accused Nos.1 to 3. He further contended that there

is no recovery of any cash or gold ornaments from the petitioners.

Investigation is already completed and charge-sheet is filed and

that they are ready to abide by any conditions. He further

contended that an offence under Section 120B of IPC would attract

against the petitioners. Hence, prayed for granting bail.

4

5.

Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for

the respondent/State seriously opposed the bail petition and

contended that the petitioners are habitual offenders. There are, in

all, 9 cases registered against the petitioners at various police

stations at Karnataka and Maharashtra State. They are habitual

offenders and if they are released on bail, they may abscond from

the case. Government Pleader further contended that these two

petitioners used to identify the house for dacoity and accused Nos.1

to 3 used to commit dacoity. All these persons came from

Maharashtra for committing the dacoity. Investigation papers

reveal prima facie material against them. Hence, prayed for

dismissal of the petition.

6.

Learned counsel for the petitioners in reply submitted

that the petitioners are on bail in other cases and the State has not

filed any application for cancellation of their bail and they are

attending the cases in other courts. Hence, prayed for granting

bail.

7.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties,

perused the records.

5

8.

On perusal of the records, it reveals, when the

complainant and his wife were sleeping in their house, in the

midnight on 03.08/04.08.2021, 3 persons broke open the door of

the complainant with help of spade, came inside the house and by

assaulting them, robbed all the gold ornaments and cash of

`10,000/- from the complainant and went away. Subsequently,

accused Nos.1 to 3 were arrested and it was revealed that these

petitioners i.e., accused Nos.4 and 5 used to identify the lonely

house and used to give information to accused Nos.1 to 3. All

these accused met in a room at a lodge and conspired and hatched

a plan to commit dacoity. Accordingly, accused Nos. 1 to 3 went to

the house and robbed gold ornaments worth `3,56,000/- and cash

of `10,000/- from the complainant’s house. Of course there is no

recovery from the petitioners. However, the police recovered the

gold ornaments from the co-accused persons.

The memo filed by the Government Pleader reveals that

there are 9 cases registered against th