VINOD KUMAR vs STATE OF KARNATAKA

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60192
CRL.P No. 1035 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 1127 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010749382024




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU


TH
DATED THIS THE 29 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1035 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)

/ 528(BNSS)-)

C/W

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1127 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)

/ 528(BNSS)-)




IN CRL.P No. 1035/2025
BETWEEN:

1. VINOD KUMAR
SON OF LATE K. BHURALAL,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 1,
CHINNASWAMY MUDALLAR ROAD,
TASKER TOWN, SHIVAJINAGAR,
BENGALURU 560 051

2. VARUN JAIN
SON OF VINOD KUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 1,
CHINNASWAMY MUDALIAR ROAD,
TASKER TOWN, SHIVAJINAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 051

…PETITIONERS
(BY SMT. AKSHATHA PRASAD M D.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA






Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60192
CRL.P No. 1035 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 1127 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010749382024


POLICE INSPECTOR,
RAMMURTHY NAGAR POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU 560 016
REP. BY SPP
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BANGALORE-560001

2. ANUP ANANDA
SON OF GYANANDA SHARMA,
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 201,
RD
3 FLOOR, VARJA APARTMENT,
ND
BAJANE HOUSE ROAD, 2 CROSS,
B. CHENNASANDRA,
BENGALURU-560-016

…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL., HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. VIJAY KASHYAP.S., ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482(FILED U/S.528
BNSS) CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL
PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.51308/2022 FOR THE OFFENCE P/US/ 454,
380 R/W SEC.411 OF IPC REGISTERED BY THE RAMAMURTHY NAGAR
POLICE STATION AGAINST THE PETITIONER PENDING ON THE FILE
OF THE XI ACMM MAYO HALL BENGLAURU QUA AND THE
PETITIONERS WHO IS ARRAYED AS ACCUSED NO.4 AND 5 AND ETC.


IN CRL.P NO. 1127/2025
BETWEEN:

1. VINOD KUMAR
SON OF LATE K. BHURALAL,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 1,
CHINNASWAMY MUDALIAR ROAD,
TASKER TOWN, SHIVAJINAGAR,
BENGALURU 560 051

2. VARUN JAIN
SON OF VINOD KUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 1,
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60192
CRL.P No. 1035 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 1127 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010749382024


CHINNASWAMY MUDALIAR ROAD,
TASKER TOWN, SHIVAJINAGAR,
BENGALURU 560 051
...PETITIONERS
(BY SMT. AKSHATHA PRASAD M D.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
RAMMURTHY NAGAR POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU 560 016
REP BY SPP,
BENGALURU.

2. SURESH BABU
SON OF LATE SESHADRI
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 1488/1,
OPP. YELLAMMA TEMPLE,
NEAR VIJINAPUR WATER TANK,
RAMMURTHY NAGAR,
BENGALURU-560016.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL., HCGP FOR R1;
R2-SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED
U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL
PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.51314/2022 FOR THE OFFENCE P/US/
454, 457, 380 R/W 411 OF IPC REGISTERED BY THE
RAMAMURTHY NAGAR POLICE STATION AGAINST THE
PETITIONERS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE XI ADDL. CJM,
MAYO HALL, BENGALURU QUA THE PETITIONERS WHO IS
ARRAYED AS ACCUSED NO.4 AND 5 AND ETC.

THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ


Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60192
CRL.P No. 1035 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 1127 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010749382024



ORAL ORDER


1. The petitioners in Crl.P.No.1035/2025 are before this
Court seeking for the following reliefs:
A) Quash the entire criminal proceedings in
C.C.No.51308/2022 for the offence p/u/s/ 454, 380
r/w sec.411 of IPC registered by the Ramamurthy
Nagar Police Station against the petitioner pending
on the file of the XI ACMM Mayo Hall Bengaluru qua
and the petitioners who is arrayed as accused no.4
and 5.

B) Grant such other relief as this Hon’ble Court
deems fit to meet the ends of justice.


2. The petitioners in Crl.P.No.1127/2025 are before this
Court seeking for the following reliefs:
A) Quash the entire criminal proceedings in
C.C.No.51314/2022 for the offence p/u/s/ 454, 457,
380 r/w sec.411 of IPC registered by the
Ramamurthy Nagar Police Station against the
petitioners pending on the file of the XI Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mayo Hall Bengaluru qua
and the petitioners who is arrayed as accused no.4
and 5.

B) Grant such other relief as this Hon’ble Court
deems fit to meet the ends of justice.

Facts in Crl.P No.1127/2025:

3. A complaint had been filed by respondent no.2 on
24.11.2020 alleging that on 17.11.2020, respondent
no.2 had locked his house and gone out of town and
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60192
CRL.P No. 1035 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 1127 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010749382024


when they returned on 24.11.2020, they found that
there was a theft which had occurred in the said
house and five items of gold had been stolen. It is in
pursuance thereof that FIR in Crime No.395/2020
was registered by Ramamurthynagar Police Station
for offences under Sections 380, 454, and 457 of the
IPC. Investigation having been completed, a charge
sheet was laid on 12.02.2021 implicating the
petitioners as accused nos. 4 and 5 on the basis of
the statement made by accused nos. 1 and 2 that
they had stolen the gold articles and had sold the
same to accused nos. 4 and 5, who are jewellers. It
is challenging the same, the petitioners are before
this court.

Facts in Crl.P No.1035/2025:

4. Respondent No. 2 had filed a complaint on
22.05.2019 that there was a theft of gold and silver
items in the house of Respondent No. 2. 25 items,
both of gold and silver, were detailed out in the said
complaint to have been stolen from the house of
Respondent No. 2. In furtherance thereof, FIR in
Crime No.234/2019 came to be registered by
Ramamurthynagar Police Station for offences under
Section 380 and 454 of IPC. Upon investigation, a
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60192
CRL.P No. 1035 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 1127 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010749382024


charge sheet was filed on 12.02.2021 implicating the
petitioners as accused no.4 and 5 on the basis of the
same statement. Challenging the same, the
petitioners are before this Court.


5. Insofar as Crl.P No.1127/2025 is concerned, perusal
of the charge sheet material would indicate that the
5 items which are stated to have been stolen and
sold to the petitioners had in fact been recovered
from the house of accused no.1. Hence, the
allegation made against the petitioners to be
implicated as accused no.4 and 5 is completely false,
is the submission of the learned counsel for the
petitioners.


6. As regards Crl.P No.1035/2025, the submission of
learned counsel for the petitioners is that no
recovery has been made from the petitioners. In fact
a perusal of the charge sheet would indicate that
they have been implicated only on the basis of a
confession statement made by accused no.1 and 2.
There is no corroborative evidence or
contemporaneous evidence which is placed on record
to implicate accused no.4 and 5 in the said offence
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60192
CRL.P No. 1035 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 1127 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010749382024


except for the confession statement made by
accused no.1 and 2.


7. She relies upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the case of Manoj Kumar Soni v. State of
M.P [2024 17 SCC 401], more particularly Paras 20
and 25, thereof which are reproduced hereunder for
easy reference:

20. A doubt looms: Can disclosure statements
per se, unaccompanied by any supporting
evidence, be deemed adequate to secure a
conviction? We find it implausible. Although
disclosure statements hold significance as a
contributing factor in unriddling a case, in our
opinion, they are not so strong a piece of
evidence sufficient on its own and without
anything more to bring home the charges
beyond reasonable doubt.
25. Coming to the case at hand, there is not a
single iota of evidence except the disclosure
statements of Manoj and the co-accused,
which supposedly led the IO to the recovery
of the stolen articles from Manoj and Rs 3000
from Kallu. At this stage, we must hold that
admissibility and credibility are two distinct
aspects and the latter is really a matter of
evaluation of other available evidence. The
statements of police witnesses would have
been acceptable, had they supported the
prosecution case, and if any other credible
evidence were brought on record. While the
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60192
CRL.P No. 1035 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 1127 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010749382024


recoveries made by the IO under Section 27
of the Evidence Act upon the disclosure
statements by Manoj, Kallu and the other co-
accused could be held to have led to discovery
of facts and may be admissible, the same
cannot be held to be credible in view of the
other evidence available on record.


8. By relying on Manoj Kumar Soni , her submission is
that an uncorroborated confession statement by a
co-accused cannot be a ground for conviction. There
being no recovery on the basis of those statements,
her submission is that the said decision being
applicable to the present fact, the proceedings
against the petitioners even if continued would not
result in any conviction requiring the quashing of the
proceedings.


9. Learned HCGP would however oppose the said
petitions and the prayer sought for by contending
that the petitioners who have been arrayed as
accused no.4 and 5 are habitual purchasers of stolen
gold. The accused no.1 and 2 having identified the
shop of accused no.4 and 5 and having categorically
stated that they had sold the gold stolen from
respondent no.2's house in Crl.P No.1035/2025, the
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60192
CRL.P No. 1035 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 1127 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010749382024


proceedings ought to continue for trial and not to be
quashed at this stage.


10. Heard Ms.Akshatha Prasad M.D., learned counsel for
the petitioners, Ms.Rashmi Patel, learned HCGP for
respondent no.1. Though respondent no.2 in Crl.P
No.1035/2025 has been served and represented by
counsel, no one has been appearing on the part of
respondent no.2 and it is for that reason that this
Court had on an earlier occasion observed that if
none were to appear for respondent no.2, the matter
would be taken up for consideration on the basis of
submission made by the counsel for the petitioner.
Insofar as respondent no.2 in Crl.P No.1127/2025 is
concerned, respondent no.2 though served has
chosen to be unrepresented.


11. The complaint in Crl.P. No.1127/2025 was lodged on
24.11.2020, whereas the complaint in Crl.P.
No.1035/2025 was lodged on 22.05.2019. In both
cases, the charge sheet came to be filed on
12.02.2021, implicating the petitioners, who are
accused Nos.4 and 5, primarily on the basis of the
confession statements allegedly made by accused
Nos.1 and 2. According to the said statements,
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified

- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60192
CRL.P No. 1035 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 1127 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010749382024


accused Nos.1 and 2 had committed theft of gold
articles from the respective houses of respondent
No.2 and thereafter sold the stolen articles to the
petitioners.


12. Insofar as Crl.P. No.1127/2025 is concerned, the
material collected during the investigation indicates
that the stolen articles were recovered from the
house of accused No.1 and not from the petitioners.
The recovery so effected does not lend support to the
allegation that the stolen articles had been sold to
accused Nos.4 and 5. On the contrary, the recovery
from the house of accused No.1 casts serious doubt
on the allegation made in the confession statement
regarding the alleged sale of the articles to the
petitioners. The prosecution has not placed any
independent material on record to corroborate the
said allegation.


13. In Crl.P. No.1035/2025, it is alleged that nearly 25
gold articles had been stolen from the house of
respondent No.2. However, none of the said articles
have been recovered during the course of
investigation. Though the charge sheet was filed on
12.02.2021, the material placed before this Court
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified

- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60192
CRL.P No. 1035 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 1127 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010749382024


does not disclose that the investigating officer had
undertaken any meaningful investigation to ascertain
the whereabouts of the alleged stolen articles after
their purported sale by accused Nos.1 and 2 to
accused Nos.4 and 5. Nor does the charge sheet
material disclose any independent evidence
indicating a relationship, association or coordination
between accused Nos.1 and 2, on the one hand, and
the petitioners, on the other, so as to substantiate
the allegation that the petitioners had purchased the
stolen articles. The absence of recovery, coupled with
the absence of independent material corroborating
the alleged sale, gives rise to serious doubt as to the
basis on which the petitioners have been implicated.


14. Theft of gold articles from residential houses is a
serious offence, and the investigation into such
offences is required to be conducted diligently and
comprehensively. The investigating officer is
expected not merely to apprehend the alleged
perpetrators and record their statements, but also to
independently verify the allegations made by them,
trace the stolen property, ascertain its subsequent
movement and collect material capable of
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified

- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60192
CRL.P No. 1035 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 1127 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010749382024


corroborating the alleged involvement of other
accused persons.


15. In the present cases, the material placed before this
Court indicates that the investigation, insofar as the
petitioners are concerned, has substantially rested
upon the statements of accused Nos.1 and 2, without
any apparent effort to independently verify or
corroborate the allegation that the stolen gold
articles had been sold to accused Nos.4 and 5.


16. In view of the deficiencies noticed above, the
Director General of Police and Inspector General of
Police, Karnataka, is directed to examine the manner
in which the investigations in these cases have been
conducted, ascertain whether the investigating
officers have followed the applicable procedures and,
if necessary, formulate and issue an appropriate
Standard Operating Procedure for investigation of
theft cases, particularly cases involving theft of gold
articles from residential houses.


17. Such procedure shall ensure that the allegations
made by an accused person against another are
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified

- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60192
CRL.P No. 1035 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 1127 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010749382024


subjected to independent verification and that
reasonable efforts are made to trace and recover the
stolen property and collect corroborative evidence.


18. Having regard to the material placed before this
Court, the implication of the petitioners appears to
rest substantially upon the confession statements of
accused Nos.1 and 2, without independent material
corroborating the alleged sale of the stolen articles to
the petitioners.


19. In Crl.P. No.1127/2025, the recovery of the articles
from the house of accused No.1 further undermines
the allegation of sale to the petitioners; whereas in
Crl.P. No.1035/2025, none of the alleged stolen
articles have been recovered and no material has
been placed to demonstrate the subsequent
movement or disposal of the articles allegedly sold to
the petitioners.


20. The material on record, therefore, does not disclose
a sufficient basis to proceed against the petitioners
or indicate a reasonable prospect of their conviction.
In these circumstances, continuation of the
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified

- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60192
CRL.P No. 1035 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 1127 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010749382024


proceedings against the petitioners would serve no
useful purpose and would result in an unnecessary
expenditure of precious judicial time. The
proceedings, insofar as the petitioners are
concerned, are liable to be quashed.


21. In that view of the matter, this Court passes the
following:

ORDER

i) Criminal petitions are allowed.

ii) In Crl.P No.1127/2025, the entire proceedings
in CC No.51314/2022 (Crime No.395/2020) for
the offence punishable under Section 454, 457,
380 r/w 411 of IPC registered by
Ramamurthynagar Police Station pending on
the file of XI Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Bengaluru qua the petitioners who
are arrayed as accused No.4 and 5 are
quashed.

iii) In Crl.P No.1035/2025, the entire proceedings
in CC No.51308/2022 (Crime No.234/2019) for
the offence punishable under Section 454, 380
r/w 411 of IPC registered by Ramamurthynagar
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru
Verified

- 15 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60192
CRL.P No. 1035 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 1127 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010749382024


Police Station pending on the file of XI
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
Bengaluru qua the petitioners who are arrayed
as accused No.4 and 5 are quashed.

iv) Though the above petitions are disposed, relist
on 14.12.2022 to enable the Director General
Police and Inspector of General Police to place
on record the SOP issued by him to the
concerned Investigating Officer in respect of
house theft, more particularly theft of gold.

v) Learned HCGP to keep the Director General
Police and Inspector of General Police informed
about the above order and coordinate with him
for filing of the said SOP .

Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
02/11/2026, 13:42, Bengaluru

Verified
(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
JUDGE




PRS
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11