Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 17780
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
S VISHWAJITH SHETTY, J
SYED RAYAN S/O SYED YONUS – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8830 OF 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI DHANANJAYA S.B.
For the Respondents: SRI RANGASWAMY, HCGP
Anticipatory bail granted based on lack of criminal history, despite accusations from a confession statement.
Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 311, 115(2), 309(4), 309(6) - Anticipatory bail - The petitioners sought bail after being arrayed as accused in charge-sheet based on confession statements of others - The court noted lack of criminal antecedents and allowed the bail. (Paras 1, 4, 6, 8)
(B) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 438 - Criteria for bail - The court emphasized that mere being named in a confession does not justify denial of bail if there are no prior records of crime and recognized the need for a balancing exercise on liberty. (Paras 5, 8)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners, accused Nos.5 and 6, obtained anticipatory bail in a robbery that resulted in a stated theft, post investigation raised concerns about the validity of their charges as they were implicated through confessions.
Findings of Court:
The petitioners displayed no prior criminal record and therefore warranted an affirmative response enabling bail to uphold personal liberty against the state’s insistent claims.
Issues: Central questions included the weight of confession statements and the implications of criminal history on bail eligibility.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that arrest based solely on a confession, in absence of prior records, especially when affirmed already by those directly involved, should not in itself preclude granting bail.
Result: Petitioners to be released on bail with conditions set forth.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. accused implicated through confessions. (Para 1 , 4 , 6) |
| 2. debate on bail justification. (Para 5) |
| 3. assessment of charges against personal liberty. (Para 8) |
ORAL ORDER
The accused Nos.5 and 6 in Crime No.68/2024 registered by Channapatna Town Police Station, Ramanagara, for the offences punishable under Sections 309 (4) and 309(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita ( BNS ), 2023 and for the offences punishable under Sections 311 and 115(2) of BNS , 2023 are before this Court under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. FIR in Crime No.68/2024 was registered by Channapatna Town Police Station, Ramanagara, initially for the offences punishable under Sections 309 (4) and 309(6) of BNS , 2023, based on the first information dated 07.11.2024 received from Sunil S/o Girish. During the course of investigation of the case, accused Nos.1 to 4 were arrested on 15.11.2024. After completing investigation, charge-sheet has been filed against 6 persons and petitioners herein are shown as absconding in the charge-sheet. Apprehending arrest in the said case, petitioners had filed Crl.Misc.No.376/2025 before the jurisdictional Sessions Court, which was rejected on 05.06.2025. Therefore, they are before this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners' have no criminal antecedents and only based on the confession statement of the arrested accused, they are now arrayed as accused Nos.5 and 6 in the charge-sheet.
Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.
5. Per contra, the learned HCGP has opposed the bail petition and submits that accused persons have shared the robbed money after the alleged incident and therefore, said amount has to be recovered from them and prays to dismiss the petition.
6. In the first information submitted by one Sunil, he has stated that on 07.11.2024, two persons entered to the petrol-bunk while he was on duty and after assaulting his colleague - Shanavaz, the accused persons robbed Rs.22,000/- and went away in the car. It is under this circumstances, FIR was initially registered against 3 persons. During the course of investigation, 4 persons were arrested in the present case on
15.11.2024.
7. As per the charge-sheet, the accused Nos.1 and 2 who had entered the petrol-bunk after attacking Shanavaz had taken away a sum of Rs.22,000/-. It is also alleged that the accused Nos.3 to 6 were inside the car in which accused No.1 and 2 had escaped. Accused Nos.1 to 4 who were arrested in the present case have been granted regular bail by this Court in Crl.P.No.360/2025; Crl.P.No.190/2025 and Crl.P.No.4198/
2025.
8. Undisputedly, the petitioners herein have no criminal antecedents and only based on the confession statement of the other accused, petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.5 and 6. Under these circumstances, I am of the opinion that the prayer made by the petitioners is required to be answered in affirmative. Accordingly, the following :
ORDER
The petition is allowed. The respondent -
