Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

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

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Chethan B., Vijaya Kumara, Madhukar Nadig
For the Respondents: Diwakar Maddur

When the main conspirators and the alleged link between information providers and perpetrators are acquitted, the prosecution's case for 'preparation to commit dacoity' under Section 399 IPC fails if the nexus and criminal intent cannot be independently established without the conspiracy.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 399 and 201 - Preparation to commit dacoity - Conviction based on acquittal of co-accused - Prosecution case was built on a chain of information passing from informants in judicial custody to the appellants - Since the trial court acquitted the co-accused involved in the conspiracy and the information flow, the substratum of the prosecution case failed - Evidence of witnesses regarding the recovery remained uncorroborated, and ownership of vehicles used for alleged preparation was not established - Prosecution failed to prove the ingredients of the offence beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 14, 18, 22-25)

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.

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

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 21195

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKAM.G.S. Kamat, JM. S. Arunkumar – AppellantVersusState Of Karnataka – RespondentCRL.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

When the main conspirators and the alleged link between information providers and perpetrators are acquitted, the prosecution's case for 'preparation to commit dacoity' under Section 399 IPC fails if the nexus and criminal intent cannot be independently established without the conspiracy.

Cases Referred (1)

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