IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION No. 11720 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) /

483(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

1. SRI SACHIN T S AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS S/O SATHEESHAN R/AT THOTATHILVEED ARINALLURU PERUGALAM POST MUNDROTHRUUTH KOLLAM KERALA – 420 021.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI LETHIF B, ADVOCATE FOR SRI HAREESH BHANDARY T, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA VITLA POLICE STATION Digitally signed by REPRESENTED BY STATE LAKSHMINARA YANA PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MURTHY RAJASHRI HIGH COURT BUILDINGS Location: HIGH COURT OF BENGALURU – 5600 001.

KARNATAKA …RESPONDENT (BY SRI MOHD. AYUB ALI, ADDL. SPP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 Cr.PC (FILED UNDER SECTION 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITONERS ON BAIL IN C.C.No.822/2025 (CR.No.2/2025) ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC BANTWAL, D.K., REGISTERED BY THE VITLA POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 62, 310(2), 351(2)

OF BNS 2023.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed by accused No.6 under Section

483 of BNSS praying to grant bail in Crime No.2/2025 of Vitla Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Section 62, 310(2), 351(2) of BNS.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl.SPP for respondent/State.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that accused Nos.1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 have been granted bail. Accused No.3 who has been granted bail by this Court is similarly placed to that of the present petitioner and therefore, he is entitled for grant of bail on the ground of parity. The complaint has been filed against unknown persons. The petitioner is stated to have purchased a mobile for Rs.95,000/- out of his share of robbed amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. Except the seizure of the said mobile purchased by the petitioner there are no other materials against him. The petitioner is in judicial custody since last one year and as the charge sheet is filed, he is not required for further custodial interrogation. With this he prayed to allow the petition.

4. Per contra, learned Additional SPP would contend that accused Nos.2, 10, 11 to 13 are absconding. The total robbed amount is Rs.48,90,000/- and out of that only Rs.5,00,000/- has been recovered. The remaining amount has to be recovered by arresting the other accused who are absconding. If the petitioner is granted bail, he may create hurdle in securing the accused persons who are absconding. The IO has sought permission for further investigation with regard to the accused persons who are absconding. The petitioner has purchased mobile worth Rs.95,000/- out of his share of robbed amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. The charge sheet material show prima-

facie case against the petitioner for the offence alleged against him. With this he prayed to reject the petition.

5. Having heard the learned counsel, the Court has perused the charge sheet and other material placed on record.

6. This Court, while allowing the bail petition of accused No.3 in the order dated 06.01.2026 passed in Crl.P.No.14317/2025 has observed under:

6. FIR in the present case was registered against six unknown persons who had arrived in an Ertiga car on 03.01.2025 and had entered the house of the first informant introducing themselves as officers of Enforcement Directorate and had committed the alleged crime. As per the charge sheet allegations, accused No.1 had conspired with accused Nos.4, 5, 8 to 10 to commit dacoity in the house of some rich person and in furtherance of such conspiracy, accused No.4 had forwarded the photos, sketch, location map etc., of the house of the first informant to accused No.9, who in turn had forwarded the same to accused No.8. Subsequently, accused No.8 allegedly had forwarded information received by him from accused No.9 to accused No.5, who in turn had forwarded the sa