[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Ramkaran @ Sonu vs The State Of Karnataka By on 19 February, 2026
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:10433
CRL.P No. 16534 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 16600 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION No. 16534 OF 2025 (439(Cr.PC) /
483(BNSS))
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION No. 16600 OF 2025
IN CRL.P No. 16534/2025
BETWEEN:
1. RAMKARAN @ SONU
S/O. BHOLA
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
R/AT. TENDUVA VILLAGE, GONDA
UTTAR PRADESH.
PIN - 271 001.
2. MANOJ
S/O. RADHE SHYAM
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYANA AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH
R/AT. HAREYAJUMAN VILLAGE
COURT OF GONDA, UTTAR PRADESH.
KARNATAKA
PIN - 271 001.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. PRATHAPA R, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
BENGALURU RURAL RAILWAY POLICE STATION
BENGALURU.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:10433
CRL.P No. 16534 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 16600 of 2025
HC-KAR
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT COMPLEX
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI HARISH GANAPATHY, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 Cr.PC (FILED
UNDER SECTION 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE
PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN S.C.No.716/2025 (CR.No.69/2024)
OF RESPONDENT BENGAOURU RURAL RAILWAY POLICE FOR
THE ALLEGED OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS
123,305(c),3(5) OF THE BNS 2023.
IN CRL.P No. 16600/2025
BETWEEN:
1. RAMKARAN @ SONU
S/O. BHOLA, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
R/AT. TENDUVA VILLAGE, GONDA
UTTAR PRADESH.
2. MANOJ
S/O. RADHE SHYAM
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
R/AT. HAREYAJUMAN VILLAGE, GONDA
UTTAR PRADESH.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI PRATHAPA R, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
BY BENGALURU CITY RAILWAY POLICE STATION
BENGALURU.
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT COMPLEX
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:10433
CRL.P No. 16534 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 16600 of 2025
HC-KAR
BENGALURU- 560 001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI HARISH GANAPATHY, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 (FILED UNDER
SECTION 483 BNSS) Cr.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE
PETITIONER ON BAIL IN S.C.No.717/2025 (CR.No.63/2024) OF
RESPONDENT-BENGALURU CITY RAILWAY POLICE FOR THE
ALLEGED OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS
123,305(c),3(5) OF BNS 2023.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
ORAL ORDER
Crl.P.No.16534 of 2025 is filed by accused Nos.1 and
3 under Section 483 of BNSS praying to grant bail in
Cr.No.69/2024 of Bengaluru Rural Railway Police Station,
registered for offences under Section 123, 305(c) of BNS,
pending in S.C.No.716/2025 on the file of LX Additional
City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-61).
2. Crl.P.No.16600/2025 is filed by accused Nos.1 and
3 under Section 483 of BNSS praying to grant bail in
Cr.No.63/2024 of Bengaluru City Railway Police Station,
registered for offences under Section 123, 305(c), 3(5) of
NC: 2026:KHC:10433
HC-KAR
BNS, pending in S.C.No.717/2025 on the file of LX
Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-
61).
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner in
both petitions and learned HCGP for respondent/State.
4. Learned counsel for petitioners would contend that
the petitioners alleged to have given some sedatives
mixed in the food articles to the passengers in railway and
after they becoming unconscious they have stolen two
mobiles. He contends that CW1 and CW2 have not been
medically examined to ascertain whether any sedatives
are given to them. The FIR is registered against unknown
persons. There is a delay in filing the complaint. Accused
No.2 has been granted bail. As the charge sheet is filed,
the petitioners are not required for custodial interrogation.
With this he prayed to allow the petitions.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP would contend that the
petitioners are having criminal antecedents and they are
NC: 2026:KHC:10433
HC-KAR
involved in five similar cases in different police stations.
The petitioners are in the habit of committing theft of
articles by giving sedatives mixed food to the passengers
in railways and committing theft of their articles. The
petitioners are residents of Uttar Pradesh and if they are
granted bail, they will flee from justice and will not be
available for trial. The charge sheet materials indicate
prima-face case against the petitioners for offences
alleged against them. One of the offences alleged is
provided with punishment of imprisonment which may
extend to 10 years. There is a recovery of two mobiles
each in both the cases at the instance of the petitioners.
With this he prayed to reject the petition.
6. Having heard the learned counsels, the Court has
perused the charge sheet and other materials placed on
record.
7. The case of the prosecution as per charge sheet in
both the cases is that when CWs.1 and 2 were travelling in
a train in general compartment, the petitioners gave them
NC: 2026:KHC:10433
HC-KAR
eatables mixed with sedative tablets and after they
consuming it and becoming unconscious, the petitioners
have stolen their mobile phones and ran away. The mobile
phones in both the cases have been seized at the instance
of the petitioners. The petitioners are having criminal
antecedents and they are involved in the following cases:
(i) Cr.No.52/2024 of Hindupura Railway Police Station
(ii) Cr.No.34/2024 of Ananthapura Railway Police Station
(iii) Cr.No.43/2024 of Dharmavaram Railway Police Station
(iv) Cr.No.207/2024 of Vijayawada Railway Police Station
8. Considering the above aspects, the petitioners are
having tendency of committing theft of the articles of the
passengers travelling in trains by giving them food to eat
containing sedatives. The petitioners are residents of Uttar
Pradesh and if they are granted bail, there are chances of
they committing similar offence and flee from justice. One
of the offence alleged against the petitioners is under
Section 123 of BNSS which is provided with punishment
NC: 2026:KHC:10433
HC-KAR
which may extend to 10 years. The charge sheet material
show prima-facie case against the petitioners for the
offences alleged against them.
9. Considering the above aspect, the petitioners have
not made out any grounds for grant of bail in both the
petition. In the result, the following:
ORDER
Both the petitions are dismissed.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
DKB
List No.: 3 Sl No.: 17
Ct.sm
