Yoshwa Rajendra @ Joshwa Rajendra vs The State Of Karnataka
2026 Latest Caselaw 3470 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Yoshwa Rajendra @ Joshwa Rajendra vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 May, 2026

Author: V Srishananda

Bench: V Srishananda

                                      -1-
                                                  NC: 2026:KHC:24611
                                             CRL.P No. 11437 of 2025


            HC-KAR



              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                      DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MAY, 2026

                                    BEFORE
                     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
                      CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11437 OF 2025
            BETWEEN:

            YOSHWA RAJENDRA @ JOSHWA RAJENDRA
            S/O RAJENDRAN
            AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
            NO.D.NO.3, CHANAL NO.6
            RAKMA BAI NIVASA
            GOPINATHA CHOUKA
            DOMBIVIL, WEST MUNBAI
            MAHARASHTRA-421202.

                                                       ...PETITIONER
            (BY SRI: TALHA ISMAIL BENGRE, ADVOCATE)

            AND:

            THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
            BY ULLAL POLICE STATION
Digitally   DAKSHINA KANNADA
signed by   REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT BUILDING
MALATESH
KC          BENGALURU-560001.
Location:
HIGH                                                  ...RESPONDENT
COURT OF    (BY SMT: WAHEEDA M.M., HCGP)
KARNATAKA

                   THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C
            (UNDER SECTION 483 BNSS) PRAYING TO GRANT AN BAIL TO
            THE PETITIONERS HEREIN BY ORDERING THE CONCERNED
            AUTHORITY TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ACCUSED NO.2 IN
                              -2-
                                           NC: 2026:KHC:24611
                                     CRL.P No. 11437 of 2025


HC-KAR



THE CASE CRIME NO.7/2025 OF ULLALA POLICE, FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 126(2), 127(7),
309(2), 309(4), 310(2), 351(2), 324(1) AND 3(5) OF BNS AND
U/S 3(1), 4, 25(1B)(b) AND 27 OF ARMS ACT, PENDING ON
THE FILE OF 7th JMFC COURT, MANGALORE.

     THIS CRL.P, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:



CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA


                         ORAL ORDER

Heard Sri Talha Ismail Bengre, learned counsel appearing

for the petitioner and Smt M M Waheeda, learned High Court

Government Pleader for the respondent - State.

2. Petitioner is accused No.2 in CC No.354 of 2025 for

the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 127(7), 309(4),

310(2), 351(2), 324(6), 331(5), 61, 238, 311, 317(3), 317(5)

of BNS, 2023 and Sections 3(1), 4, 25(1B)(b) and 27(1) of

Indian Arms Act, 1959.

3. Insofar as accused Nos.7, 8 and 9, the Investigating

Officer who was summoned before the Court submitted to the

NC: 2026:KHC:24611

HC-KAR

Court an affidavit that supplementary/additional charge sheet

would be filed.

4. In respect of other accused persons, the co-

ordinate Bench of this Court has already granted bail after

hearing the prosecution. In fact, the master mind of the entire

incident is accused No.1 who has been granted bail by the co-

ordinate Bench of this Court after hearing the prosecution.

5. Insofar as the present petitioner is concerned, the

role assigned to him as seen from Column No.17 is that, he

was made to stand in front of co-operative society and to keep

a watch, so as to prevent the other public entering into the

society, while robbing the society. So also, there is an

allegation that the present petitioner has purchased a gunny

bag and after robbing of the society, accused No.2 and 7 have

collected the ornaments and loaded the same into the gunny

bag.

6. When accused Nos.2 and 7 were moving out of the

society, CWs.1 to 5 raised alarm for the help. At that juncture,

it is accused Nos.3 and 9 who have shown the gun point to

NC: 2026:KHC:24611

HC-KAR

CWs.1 to 5 and made them silent. Column No.17 also reveals

that the live bullet was handed over by accused No.3 to

accused No.2 and thereafter, accused Nos.2, 7, 8 and 9 flee

away from the spot and got into the car which was driven by

accused No.1.

7. In other words, when there is no specific overt act

as to actual robbing by accused No.2 and the persons who

robbed the society and also threatened CWs.1 to 5 in a gun

point, namely, accused No.3 has been granted bail and accused

No.9 is still absconding, on the ground of parity alone, the

present petitioner is to be enlarged on bail.

8. However, learned High Court Government Pleader

would oppose the bail request contending that petitioner is the

resident of Maharastra and therefore, if enlarged on bail, there

is no possibility of he appearing before the Court.

9. On considering the same, this Court is of the

opinion that if three sureties are ordered, of which, one cash

security, one local surety and one regular surety, the

apprehension of the prosecution can be met with.

NC: 2026:KHC:24611

HC-KAR

10. Accordingly, without expressing further opinion on

merits of the matter, the following:

ORDER

The Criminal Petition is allowed on following conditions:

(i) Petitioner - accused No.2 shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with three sureties for the likesum, of which, one cash surety i.e., Rs.1,00,000/-, one local surety and one regular surety to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Judge;

(ii) Petitioner - accused No.2 shall not threaten the prosecution witnesses, in any manner;

(iii) Petitioner - accused No.2 shall attend the Court regularly;

(iv) Petitioner - accused No.2 shall not leave the jurisdiction of Maharastra and Karnataka State without prior permission;

(v) Petitioner - accused No.2 shall not indulge in any criminal activities.

NC: 2026:KHC:24611

HC-KAR

If there is violation of any one of the conditions, the

prosecution is at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

Ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

(V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE

BGN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16