Choudri Ruhulla Vs State of Karnataka

Digitally signed by PAVITHRA N AND: Location: High Court of Karnataka STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KUDUR P.S. REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶12

…RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY Ms. ASMA KOUSER., ADDL. SPP)

¶14

2 -

¶15

NC: 2026:KHC:22286 CRL.P No. 5193 of 2026

¶16

HC-KAR

¶17

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 438 CR.PC (FILED U/S 482 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT POLICE TO RELEASE HIM ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF ARREST IN CRIME NO.15/2026 OF KUDUR POLICE STATION, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 303(2) OF BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023 AND UNDER SECTIONS 86, 87 OF KARNATAKA FOREST ACT, 1963, WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C AT MAGADI.

¶18

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶19

ORAL ORDER

¶20

The petitioner / accused No.7, is before this Court seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.15/2026 filed by the respondent-police for the offence under Section 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 86 and 87 of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963.

¶21

Brief facts of the case:

¶22

The case of the prosecution is that, the complainant is the owner of the agricultural land measuring 12 acres 14 guntas situated in Survey No.22 of Yellapur Village,

¶23

3 -

¶24

NC: 2026:KHC:22286 CRL.P No. 5193 of 2026

¶25

HC-KAR

¶26

Magadi Taluk, wherein he had grown sandalwood trees. The said trees are approximately 14 years old. Sri Gurusiddayya and Ashoka, who are the residents of Yellapur village, were taking care of the land. On 12.01.2026, when the complainant was in Bengaluru on his work, Gurusiddayya informed him over the phone that unknown persons had illegally entered the land during the night hours on 11.01.2026 and committed theft of sandalwood trees. On receiving the said information, the complainant visited his land and found that approximately 40 sandalwood trees had been cut and stolen by unknown persons. Based on the said complaint, the respondent – police have registered a case against unknown persons. They conducted the investigation. During the investigation, the name of the present petitioner was disclosed by the co-accused. Based on the strength of the said statement, this petitioner has been arraigned as one of the accused. The respondent – police have conducted investigation and submitted charge sheet.

¶27

4 -

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:22286 CRL.P No. 5193 of 2026

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

Heard Mr. M.Shashidhara, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Asma Kouser, learned Addl. SPP for the respondent – State.

¶31

The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences. The overt act against the present petitioner is that, the other accused had sold the stolen sandalwood trees weighing 40 kgs., to the present petitioner. However, the said aspect is baseless and false. The petitioner is ready to co-operate with the investigation as and when it is required. In fact, the petitioner is going to perform the marriage of his son on 26 and 27 of April, 2026. Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions, and he will abide by the conditions in the event of his release on bail. Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.

¶32

Per contra, learned Addl. SPP for the respondent – State vehemently submitted that the petitioner has committed a heinous offence along with the other accused. He is the

¶33

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:22286 CRL.P No. 5193 of 2026

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

receiver of the stolen goods. The investigation is required to be carried out to recover the said sandalwood pieces. If the petition is allowed, there may not be any chance to conduct a fair investigation. Hence, it is not appropriate to grant any relief as prayed for in the petition. Making such submissions, learned Addl. SPP prays to reject the petition.

¶36

Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also on perusal of the averments of the charge sheet, it appears from the record that, initially, a complaint came to be registered against unknown persons. Subsequently, during investigation, the other accused have been implicated in this case. However, the present petitioner has been implicated in this case on the basis of the voluntary statement of the co-accused.

¶37

Be that as it may, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention that the petitioner has to perform the marriage of his son on 26^th and 27^th of April, 2026. Moreover, the alleged offences are neither punishable with death nor imprisonment for life and are exclusively triable by the Magistrate. Having considered the said

¶38

6 -

¶39

NC: 2026:KHC:22286 CRL.P No. 5193 of 2026

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

aspect, it is appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner, by imposing suitable conditions that would take care of the apprehension of the prosecution.

¶42

Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

¶43

ORDER

¶44

(i) The Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶45

(ii) The petitioner is ordered to be

¶46

enlarged on bail, in the event of his arrest, in Crime No.15/2026 of respondent-police for the offences stated supra , on executing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.

¶47

(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the

¶48

Investigating Officer within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order, to execute the personal bond and also to furnish surety.

¶49

(iv) The petitioner shall co-operate with

¶50

the investigation as and when it is required.

¶51