- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1440 CRL.P No. 100299 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100299 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SHRI. UDAY S/O. RAMAKRISHNA SHETTY AGE. 37 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. DHARMANABYLE, CHIPAGI, TQ. SIRSI, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA-581402. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R.H.ANGADI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STAE OF KARNATAKA (BANAVASI POLICE STATION), R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580011. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ASHOK T.KATTIMANI, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (528 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO, QUASH THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN BANAVASI POLICE STATION IN P.S. CRIME NO.121/2024, FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 78(3) OF KP ACT, PENDING CC NO.2602/2024, ON THE FILE OF IIIRD ADDL.JMFC COURT, SIRSI, SO FAR AS PETITIONER WHO IS ARRAYED AS ACCUSED NO.2. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.01.29 15:27:19 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1440 CRL.P No. 100299 of 2025 ORAL ORDER 1. The learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondent – State. 2. The petitioner is being prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 78(3) of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963. 3. The complaint indicates that, upon securing permission, a raid was conducted during which Accused No. 1 was apprehended while engaged in gambling. In his confession statement, Accused No. 1 alleged that the entire game was being conducted at the instance of the petitioner, leading the police to arraign the petitioner as Accused No. 2. However, apart from the confession statement of Accused No. 1, there is no material evidence to substantiate the allegation that the petitioner was responsible for conducting the game. 4. It is a well-settled principle of law that any confession made to the police is inadmissible under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. In the absence of any corroborative material to support the allegation that the petitioner was responsible for conducting the game, the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner would amount to an abuse of the process of law. Accordingly, the following order is passed: ORDER i) The petition is allowed. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1440 CRL.P No. 100299 of 2025 ii) The impugned proceedings in CC No.2602/2024 pending on the file of the learned III Addl. JMFC Court, Sirsi, insofar as it relates to the petitioner – accused No.2 is hereby quashed. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE BKM Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30