Aadrikaa Legal Services (ALS)- Law I Litigation I Arbitration
Date: 03.11.2026
Karnataka HC Denies Anticipatory and Regular Bail to Accused in Kolar Robbery FIR
This Short Article has been prepared & written by Advocate G Sridharamurthy. The views expressed are based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his mob no- +91 9845906418 and email id sriadv3@gmail.com .
The Karnataka High Court has dismissed both anticipatory and regular bail petitions filed by two accused in a robbery case registered by Malur Police in Kolar district.
Case background
The matter arose from Crime No. 355/2026, registered by Malur Police for alleged offences under Section 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. The petitions were heard together by Justice S. Vishwajith Shetty and decided on 30 October 2026.
The prosecution case is based on a complaint made by a truck driver, Shantesh, who alleged that two unidentified persons intercepted his truck on the night of 22 August 2026. According to the complaint, the men arrived on a two-wheeler bearing registration number KA53 Y 1623, threatened the driver with a long, bladed weapon, and allegedly took Rs. 15,000 before fleeing.
Bail petitions before the High Court
M. Ananda, identified as accused No. 1, sought anticipatory bail because he feared arrest in the case. His earlier application before the Sessions Court had been rejected on 16 September 2026.
Prabhu Rao K.M., also known as Prabhu and identified as accused No. 2, sought regular bail. He was arrested on 23 August 2026 and had remained in judicial custody since then. His earlier bail plea was rejected by the Sessions Court on 24 September 2026.
Investigation status and prosecution objections
During the investigation, police arrested accused No. 2 and reported recovering Rs. 5,000 and the motorcycle allegedly used in the offence from him. Accused No. 1 was stated to be absconding at the time of the hearing.
The State opposed bail on the basis that a test identification parade had not yet been conducted. The High Court Government Pleader also informed the court that both accused had criminal antecedents and had previously been implicated in a similar case.
Courtβs decision
The High Court held that, given the pending test identification parade, the allegation of prior criminal involvement, and the stage of the investigation, the requests for anticipatory bail and regular bail could not be accepted.
Both Criminal Petition No. 15510 of 2026, filed by M. Ananda, and Criminal Petition No. 15186 of 2026, filed by Prabhu Rao K.M., were dismissed.
Key implication
The decision reflects the courtβs view that bail may be declined where identification procedures remain incomplete and the investigation indicates alleged prior criminal conduct, particularly in a case involving allegations of armed robbery and recovery of suspected evidence.
Aadrikaa Legal Services is a trusted legal and regulatory support partner providing end-to-end legal solutions to law firms, corporate organizations, and businesses across India. We specialize in paralegal services, litigation support, tax and regulatory matters, delivering reliable, efficient, and result-oriented legal assistance.
Our services include comprehensive paralegal support, drafting and documentation, legal research, case management, litigation handling, and representation support across various judicial and quasi-judicial forums. We also assist in direct and indirect tax matters, customs, GST, corporate regulatory compliance, and legal advisory.
Source: Karnataka High Court
Handy Download:
Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com
Tel: +91-11-4999 2707
Leave a Reply