IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
G. Basavaraja, J.
Karthik S, S/o Subramani - Appellant
Versus
The State By Tarikere Police Rep. By State Public Prosecutor Bangalore – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1155 of 2013 (C), Criminal Appeal No. 1133 of 2013, Criminal Appeal No. 1173 of 2013
Decided On : 10-11-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the case and trial court background. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. details of the prosecution's case and evidence presented. (Para 6 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. defenses and contentions raised by the appellants. (Para 7 , 8 , 10) |
| 4. final judgment and order of acquittal. (Para 11 , 21 , 23) |
| 5. critical analysis of the prosecution's evidence and identification procedures. (Para 15 , 16 , 18 , 19) |
| 6. court's reasoning and findings regarding the lack of credible evidence. (Para 20 , 22) |
JUDGMENT :
G. Basavaraja, J.
All three appeals arise out of the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 21.11.2013 passed in Sessions Case No.154/2010 clubbed with S.C. No.36/2012 on the file of II Addl. Sessions Judge, Chikkamagalur. During the pendency of the case before the trial Court, accused No.2 was reported to be dead and case against accused No.2 was abated.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as per their status before the trial Court.
3. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that, the Police Inspector, Tarikere filed charge-sheet against accused Nos.1 to 5 for the offence punishable under Section 395 of Indian Penal Code. It is alleged by the prosecution that on 16.07.2010 at about 7.00 am when CW21 was in charge of police station, complainant-CW1 came to the police station and lodged the complaint alleging that, on 14.07.2010, he had been to Bangalore to the house of his niece. On 15.07.2010, after purchasing clothes and cable he boarded the Intercity train in Bangalore in order to go to Bhadravathi. He reached Bhadravathi at about 09.30 p.m. After getting down from the train, he was proceeding towards his village on his motorcycle No.KA.18/R-5888. While he was so proceeding at about 10.30 p.m, near the turning which leads to M.C.Halli quarters, two persons aged about 25-30 years, enquired the road to Karakucchi and after showing the Karakucchi road he proceeded further. At that time, two persons came from opposite direction holding longs on seeing them, he took his vehicle towards M.C Halli quarters, near M.C Halli quarters road, a Maruti van was parked beside the road, two persons stopped the vehicle, four persons came towards him and snatched the bag which was kept on the petrol tank of the bike. Thereafter, two persons came and by wielding long, snatched the amount and mobile set. Thereafter, two persons pushed him from the motorcycle, assaulted him and took his motorcycle and went towards M.C Halli quarters and the remaining four persons left in Martuti van. He had seen the number of Maruti van with the help of tail-lamp and number is KA-03/C-226. Thereafter, he went to the house of the Chinnathambi, which is situated in M.C Halli and thereafter, he had gone to his village on the bike with one Basavaraju. Thus, he lodged a complaint to take action against the persons who committed dacoity. Upon complaint, PSI attached to Tarikere Police Station registered the case in Crime No.145/2010 for the offence punishable under of IPC and transmitted First Information Report to the jurisdictional Magistrate. On the same day, CW21 visited the place of occurrence and conducted spot mahazar in the presence of panchas and recorded the statements of witnesses. He deputed staff to trace the accused persons and handed over the case file to CW24-Circle Inspector of Police for further investigation. After receiving the case file, CW24 took up for further investigation. Accused Nos.1 to 4 along with Maruti van bearing No. KA-03/C-226, was produced before the C.P.I. He interrogated accused 1 to 4 and recovered the cash, vehicle and other materials in the presence of panch witnesses and recorded voluntary statements of accused 1 to 4. In pursuance of the voluntary statement, C.P.I recovered the stolen articles under the mahazar at the instance of accused 1 to 4 and recorded the statements of the witnesses and thereafter, handed over the file to CW23 for further investigation. CW23 has partly

The court emphasized the necessity of reliable identification and evidentiary support to uphold a conviction under IPC Section 395, finding significant procedural failures in the prosecution's case.
The conviction under IPC Sections 391 and 395 was undermined by unreliable identification evidence and procedural delays, warranting the benefit of the doubt for the appellants.
For a conviction under IPC Section 395, participation of five or more persons is essential, and identification procedures must meet legal standards; failure leads to acquittal.
The judgment establishes the importance of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of weapons, and the conduct of the accused in determining guilt in a dacoity case.
The prosecution failed to establish the appellants' guilt beyond a reasonable doubt due to inconsistencies in witness testimonies and procedural irregularities in identification parades.
Identification in court serves as primary evidence, with errors in pre-trial identifications not automatically rendering testimonies invalid if verifiable by corroborating evidence.
The prosecution failed to prove the essential elements of the dacoity charge, including the loading of cash in the van, leading to the quashing of convictions.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.