High Court of Karnataka Allows Revision Petition in Housebreaking and Theft Case — Petitioner Granted Pre-arrest Bail. Court held that custodial interrogation was not necessary as the petitioner had cooperated with investigation and the alleged offence under Sections 457 and 380 IPC did not involve violence or recovery of stolen property.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU In Favour of Accused

Admin

2026-05-18 11:36:06

Font size:

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Shri Vishal Ramesh Khatwani, filed a revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the order dated 09.11.2023 passed by the learned VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, in Crime No.256/2023. The case was registered on a complaint lodged by Smt. Komathi, W/o Nagesh, at Sanjay Nagar Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 380 (theft) and 457 (housebreaking by night) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The petitioner had filed an application for pre-arrest bail before the Magistrate, which was dismissed. Aggrieved, he approached the High Court. The court examined the facts and submissions. The petitioner's counsel argued that the petitioner had cooperated with the investigation and that custodial interrogation was not required as the alleged theft did not involve any violence or recovery of stolen property. The State opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offence. The court, after considering the nature of the offence and the fact that the petitioner had already joined the investigation, held that custodial interrogation was not necessary. The court allowed the revision petition, set aside the Magistrate's order, and granted pre-arrest bail to the petitioner subject to conditions, including executing a personal bond and furnishing sureties.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure Code - Pre-arrest Bail - Section 438 CrPC - Anticipatory Bail - Petitioner sought pre-arrest bail in a case under Sections 457 and 380 IPC - Court held that custodial interrogation was not necessary as the petitioner had cooperated with investigation and no recovery was required - Held that the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail subject to conditions (Paras 2-5).

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail in a case registered under Sections 457 and 380 IPC, considering the nature of the offence and the necessity of custodial interrogation.

Final Decision

The revision petition is allowed. The order dated 09.11.2023 passed by the learned VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, in Crime No.256/2023 is set aside. The petitioner is granted pre-arrest bail subject to conditions including executing a personal bond and furnishing sureties.

Law Points

Pre-arrest bail
custodial interrogation
Section 438 CrPC
Section 457 IPC
Section 380 IPC
cooperation with investigation
no recovery required

Case Details

2024 LawText (KAR) (10) 1

CRL.RP No.210/2024

2024-10-04

V. Srishananda

Sri Pruthveen P. Kattimani for Sri Giridhar.H, Advocates (for petitioner); Sri B.A.Belliyappa, SPP alongwith Sri Vinay Mahadevaiah, HCGP (for respondent)

Shri Vishal Ramesh Khatwani

State of Karnataka

Nature of Litigation

Criminal revision petition challenging dismissal of pre-arrest bail application

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought setting aside of order dated 09.11.2023 and grant of pre-arrest bail

Filing Reason

Petitioner's pre-arrest bail application was dismissed by the Magistrate

Previous Decisions

Order dated 09.11.2023 by VIII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, in Cr.No.256/2023 dismissing the pre-arrest bail application

Issues

Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC in a case under Sections 457 and 380 IPC? Whether custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner's counsel argued that the petitioner had cooperated with investigation and custodial interrogation was not required as no recovery was needed. State opposed bail citing seriousness of the offence.

Ratio Decidendi

Pre-arrest bail can be granted when custodial interrogation is not necessary, especially when the accused has cooperated with investigation and the offence does not involve violence or recovery of stolen property.

Judgment Excerpts

Facts in brief which are utmost necessary for disposal of the revision petition are as under: Upon the complaint lodged by Smt. Komathi, W/o Nagesh, a case came to be registered in Cr.No.256/2023 by Sanjay Nagar Police for the offence punishable under Section 380 and 457 IPC.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed an application for pre-arrest bail before the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, which was dismissed on 09.11.2023. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present revision petition under Section 397 r/w 401 CrPC before the High Court of Karnataka.