High Court of Karnataka Grants Bail to Accused in Robbery and Extortion Case Under BNS 2023 — Prima Facie Case Not Made Out Against Accused Nos. 3 and 4. Court held that mere presence at the scene without specific overt acts does not justify denial of bail under Sections 310(2), 311, 238, 312 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: KALABURAGI In Favour of Accused
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The judgment pertains to two criminal petitions filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) seeking bail for the petitioners, who are accused Nos. 3 and 4 in Crime No.112/2024 registered at Hubballi Town Police Station. The offences alleged include Sections 310(2) (robbery), 311 (extortion), 238 (criminal conspiracy), and 312 (theft) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023. The petitioners, Edwin Thomas (accused No.4) and Febin N (accused No.3), both residents of Kerala, were arrested in connection with the crime. The court heard arguments from the counsel for the petitioners, Sri. Biju P. Raman and Sri. Pranav S. Katageri, and the High Court Government Pleader, Smt. Girija S. Hiremath. The court observed that the role attributed to the petitioners was not specific and that no prima facie case was made out against them. Consequently, the court allowed both petitions and granted bail to the petitioners subject to conditions, including furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with one surety, reporting to the police station once a month, and not tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure - Bail - Section 439 CrPC / Section 483 BNSS - Prima Facie Case - Petitioners/accused Nos. 3 and 4 sought bail in Crime No.112/2024 for offences under Sections 310(2), 311, 238, 312 of BNS 2023 - Court held that the role attributed to the petitioners was not specific and no prima facie case was made out against them - Held that bail should be granted subject to conditions (Paras 1-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioners/accused Nos. 3 and 4 are entitled to bail in Crime No.112/2024 for offences punishable under Sections 310(2), 311, 238, 312 of BNS 2023.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Both petitions are allowed. Petitioners shall be enlarged on bail on executing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with one surety, subject to conditions including reporting to the police station once a month and not tampering with evidence.

Law Points

  • Bail
  • Prima Facie Case
  • Section 439 CrPC
  • Section 483 BNSS
  • Robbery
  • Extortion
  • Criminal Conspiracy
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (KAR) (04) 57

CRL.P No. 101502 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 101503 of 2025

2025-04-29

V.Srishananda

NC: 2025:KHC-D:7038

Sri. Biju P. Raman, Sri. Pranav S. Katageri, Sri. Sampath Kumar S. Meti (for petitioners), Smt. Girija S. Hiremath (for respondent)

Edwin Thomas S/o. Thomas V P (in CRL.P No.101502/2025) and Febin N S/o Shaju (in CRL.P No.101503/2025)

State of Karnataka through Hubli Town Police Station

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal bail petitions under Section 483 BNSS / Section 439 CrPC

Remedy Sought

Enlargement of petitioners/accused Nos. 3 and 4 on bail in Crime No.112/2024

Filing Reason

Petitioners were arrested and sought bail for offences under Sections 310(2), 311, 238, 312 of BNS 2023

Issues

Whether the petitioners are entitled to bail given the nature of allegations and prima facie case.

Submissions/Arguments

Counsel for petitioners argued that no prima facie case is made out against accused Nos. 3 and 4. State opposed bail citing seriousness of offences.

Ratio Decidendi

Bail should be granted when no prima facie case is made out against the accused and the role attributed is not specific.

Judgment Excerpts

Since both petitions arise out of same Crime No.112/2024, they are heard together and taken up for disposal. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader. On perusal of the material on record, the role attributed to the petitioners is not specific and no prima facie case is made out against them. Hence, the following order is passed.

Acts & Sections

  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023: 310(2), 311, 238, 312
  • Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: 483
  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 439
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Grants Bail to Accused in Robbery and Extortion Case Under BNS 2023 — Prima Facie Case Not Made Out Against Accused Nos. 3 and 4. Court held that mere presence at the scene without specific overt acts does not justify denial...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Acquits Accused in Abetment of Suicide and SC/ST Act Case Due to Lack of Evidence of Instigation. Allegations of Caste-Based Insult and Harassment Not Proven Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Sections 306, 323, 324, 354 IPC and Se...