Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 21195
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
M.G.S. Kamat, J
M. S. Arunkumar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka – Respondent
CRL.A No. 89 of 2014|CRL.A No. 88 of 2014|CRL.A No. 117 of 2014|CRL.A No. 138 of 2014|CRL.A No. 149 of 2014|CRL.A No. 279 of 2015
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Appeals against Conviction
Act Referred
Code of Criminal Procedure: S.235, S.313
Arms Act: S.25
Headnote
Facts of the case:
The appellants were convicted by the trial court for preparation to commit dacoity and for destruction of evidence. The prosecution alleged that the appellants were part of a conspiracy initiated by informants in jail to rob a merchant. However, the trial court acquitted the alleged conspirators and the information providers. The appellants appealed against their conviction, contending that the acquittal of the co-accused destroyed the foundation of the prosecution's case.
Findings of Court:
The Court held that the prosecution failed to establish the conspiracy or the link between the information and the appellants' alleged preparation. Since the witnesses turned hostile and the corroborating evidence was absent, the charges under Sections 399 and 201 IPC were not proven. The conviction was set aside.
Issues: Whether the appellants could be convicted for preparation to commit dacoity when the alleged conspirators and information providers were acquitted.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the substratum of the prosecution's case—the conspiracy and the chain of information—is disbelieved by the acquittal of the alleged conspirators, individual charges of preparation cannot be sustained based on unsupported recovery of weapons without linking them to the specific criminal intent alleged by the prosecution.
Result: Appeals allowed; convictions set aside and appellants acquitted.
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Chethan B., Vijaya Kumara, Madhukar Nadig
For the Respondents: Diwakar Maddur
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of prosecution case, trial court charges, and framing of issues. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. summary of arguments by counsel for appellants and the state. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 3. court discussion on the failure of evidence regarding criminal conspiracy. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 4. evaluation of hostile witness testimony and lack of incriminating evidence. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 5. final order granting acquittal to the appellants. (Para 26) |
IN CRL.A No.89/2014
BETWEEN:
M. S. ARUNKUMAR @ ARUN @ ANNI
S/O. SHIVAKUMAR
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
RESIDING AT DARGA ROAD, 4TH BLOCK
MADHUGIRI-572 132
TUMKUR DISTRICT.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI CHETHAN B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KIBBANAHALLI POLICE STATION
TIPTUR-572 201
TUMKUR DISTRICT
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI DIWAKAR MADDUR, H.C.G.P.)
IN CRL.A NO.88/2014
BETWEEN:
D. R. ROHITH
AGED 19 YEARS
S/O. RENUKAPRASAD
R/O. YALLAPURA
BEHIND RICE MILL
TUMKUR.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI VIJAYA KUMARA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
KIBBANAHALLI POLICE STATION
TUMKUR DISTRICT
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI DIWAKAR MADDUR, H.C.G.P.)
IN CRL.A NO.117/2014
BETWEEN:
1. T. P. PRAVEENA @ JANGLI
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
S/O. PUTTARAJU
RESIDING OPPOSITE JAYABHARAT TALKIES
MANDIPET-572 101
TUMKUR DISTRICT
2. J. RAJESHA
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
S/O. LATE JOTHAPPA
RESIDING AT KEREGALA PALYA
MADHUGIRI-572 132
TUMKUR DISTRICT
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI CHETHAN B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KIBBANAHALLI POLICE STATION
TIPTUR-572 201
TUMKUR DISTRICT
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI DIWAKAR MADDUR, H.C.G.P.)
IN CRL.A NO.138/2014
BETWEEN:
SUNIL KUMAR
S/O. VENKATAPPA
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS
R/O. CHANNAPANA PALYA
TUMKUR DISTRICT
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI MADHUKAR NADIG, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE BY KIBBANAHALLI POLICE STATION
REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING
BENGALURU-560 001
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI DIWAKAR MADDUR, H.C.G.P.)
IN CRL.A NO.149/2014
BETWEEN:
M. N. MALATHESHA
S/O. NARASIMHAMURTHY
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
RESIDING OPPOSITE POST OFFICE
TUMKUR GATE
MADHUGIRI-572 132
TUMKUR DISTRICT.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI CHETHAN B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KIBBANAHALLI POLICE STATION
TIPTUR-572 201
TUMKUR DISTRICT
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI DIWAKAR MADDUR, H.C.G.P.)
IN CRL.A NO. 279/2015
BETWEEN:
KIRAN
AGE 20 YEARS
S/O. SIDDAPPA
R/O. 1ST MAIN ROAD, 5TH CROSS
BANK COLONY, CANARA LAYOUT
BENGALURU-39
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI VIJAYA KUMARA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
KIBBANAHALLI POLICE STATION
TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 201
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI DIWAKAR MADDUR, H.C.G.P.)
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
ORAL JUDGMENT
Criminal Appeal No.89/2014 is by accused No.4, Crl.A.No.88/2014 is by accused No.5, Crl.A.No.117/2014 is by accused Nos.1 and 2, Crl.A.No.138/2017 is by accused No.3, Crl.A.No.149/2014 is by accused No.6 and Crl.A.No.279/2015 is by accused No.7 being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 25.01.2015 passed in Special Case No.2/2013 on the file of V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiptur, ('trial Court' for brevity) by which, the trial Court has passed the following order;
"By exercising powers U/S.235 Cr.P.C., accused No.1 to 7 are convicted for the offences punishable U/Ss.399 & 201 of I.P.C, accused No.8 to 10 are acquitted for the offences punishable U/Ss.399 & 201 of I.P.C; Accused No.1 to 13, 16 & 17 are acquitted for the offence punishable U/S.400 I.P.C.; accused No.1 to 17 are acquitted for the offence P/U/S.120-B I.P.C. and accused No.1 is acquitted for the offence punishable U/S.25 of Arms Act.
The bail bonds of accused No.8, 10, 11, 14 & 15 stands cancelled.
Jail S.P. is directed to release accused No.9, 12, 13 & 16 forthwith, if they are not required in any other case.
Case is posted to hear before sentence of accused No.1 to 7."
2. The case of prosecution is that on 06.06.2012 at 09.15 p.m. at Tiptur-Chikkanayakanahally roa
