Bail may be granted even when lack of direct evidence exists, given the nature of the offence and the accused's ties to the community.

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T)

Heard Sri.Santosh B. Malagoudar, learned counsel for the petitioners-accused Nos.2, 5 and 6 and Smt.Kirtilata Patil, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.

2. Crl.P.No.102248/2025 is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.2 and 5 and Crl.P.No.102250/2025 is filed by petitioner-accused No.6 under Section 483 of BNS S-2023 (439 of Cr.P.C .) to enlarge them on bail in Crime No.72/2025 of Chikodi Police, registered for the offences punishable under Section 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ BNS , 2023’).

3. Brief facts of the prosecution case are as under: On 26.04.2025, at about 2.50 pm., near Umrani Ghat at Chikodi, when the first informant was returning in his Tata Canter bearing No.KA-22/D-1179 along with an HC-KAR amount of Rs.1,90,000/- received from the sale of ground nuts at Sangli Desai shop, some unknown persons followed his vehicle in their motorcycle and obstructed his truck under the guise that they got information that ganja was being smuggled in the canter vehicle. They insisted first informant to check the vehicle. Thus, they snatched mobile phone and cash of Rs.1,90,000/- from the first informant and issued criminal intimidation to eliminate first informant. Thus, first informant lodged complaint which leads to registration of FIR and investigation.

During the course of the investigation i.e. on

01.05.2025, when the investigating officer was on patrolling duty, he found five persons in a Ritz car in a suspected manner. Hence, he enquired with the said accused persons, they confessed before the investigating officer as to commission of offence which took place on 26.04.2025 near Umrani Ghat. Therefore, these petitioners are arraigned as accused Nos.2, 5 and 6 in the HC-KAR case and in turn they were arrested and remanded to judicial custody. Hence, these petitions.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners are innocent and have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. It is only on the voluntary statement of accused No.1, these petitioners have been implicated in the case. The petitioners are ready to abide by the conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, prays to allow the petitions.

5. Per contra, the learned HCGP contended that the petitioners are also members of the dacoit. Prima facie there are allegations against the accused persons. If they are released on bail, they may tamper prosecution witnesses and threaten the complainant and other witnesses. Further accused Nos.2 and 6 are habitual offenders. A separate crime has been registered against them in different police stations. Hence, he prays to dismiss the bail petitions.

HC-KAR

6. On perusal of the material available on record, it appears that at the time of commission of offence, the petitioners-accused Nos.2, 5 and 6 were not at the spot. As per the FIR and complaint, only two persons followed the truck of the first informant and they committed robbery and thereafter all the accused persons shared the amount. So far as allegations against accused Nos.2 and 6 are concerned, they are habitual offenders. Insofar as accused No.2 is concerned, the offence under Section 489(a)(b)(c) of IPC has been registered and insofar as accused No.6 is concerned, the offence under Sections

504, 506, 323, 324 of IPC are registered.

7. In the instant case, the investigating officer has not conducted a Test Identification parade for identification of accused Nos.1 and 2 and to establish the aspect of criminal conspiracy. At this juncture, the investigating officer has not placed any call details register of accused Nos.1 to 6 to substantiate that accused Nos.2, 5 and 6 were also members of criminal conspiracy.