- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4411 WP No. 22784 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 22784 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. SRINIVAS S/O VENAKTAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/A NO. 4, 5TH CROSS, NANADINI LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 56 0096. 2. SRI. SURESH R, S/O RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/A NO. 17, 17TH MAIN, FF LAYOUT, LAGGERE, BANGALORE - 560 096. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SRIKANTH N.V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY KEMPAPURA AGRAHARA POLICE STATION, VIJAYANAGARA SUB DIVISION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. SRI. JIGNESH P, S/O NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/A KP AGRAHARA POLICE STATION, K P AGRAHARA, BENGALURU CITY - 560 023. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDL. SPP FOR R1 AND R2) Digitally signed by LEELAVATHI S R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4411 WP No. 22784 of 2024 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SEC. 528 OF BHARATHIYA NAGARIKA SURAKSHA SANHITHA ACT PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET IN CC NO. 76/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE MMTC-2 BANGALORE AGAINST THE PETITIONERS HEREIN FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 79 AND 80 OF KP ACT 1963 BASED ON THE COMPLAINT GIVEN BY THE R2 IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AS PER ANN-D AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs: "i. Issue writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ to quash the charge sheet in CC No.76/2024 on the file of MMTC-2 Bangalore against the petitioners herein for the offence punishable under section 79 and 80 of KP act 1963 based on the complaint given by the 2nd respondent in so far as the petitioners are concerned in the interest of justice as per Annexure-D. ii. Grant any other relief or reliefs in the facts and circumstances of the case." 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional SPP for respondents and perused the material on record. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4411 WP No. 22784 of 2024 3. Perusal of the material on record would indicate that respondents have initiated proceedings against the petitioner under Section 79 and 80 of Karnataka Police Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'K.P.Act' for short) which are non-cognizable offences, without obtaining necessary prior permission from the learned Magistrate as mandatorily required under Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. 4. Under identical circumstances, in the case of "M/s. Legends Culture Association (R) and Anr. vs. State of Karnataka and Anr.," Crl.P.No.7424/2024 the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court held as under:- "Heard the learned counsel Sri. Bharath Kumar V., appearing for the petitioners and Smt. Sowmya R., the learned HCGP appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioners are before this Court, seeking for the following prayers: "a. Quash the FIR bearing No.156/2024 along with the information dated 27.04.2024 registered with the respondent No. 1 Holalkere Police Station wherein the Petitioners herein are arraigned as accused for the alleged offence under Section 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act, Pending on file Senior Civil judge & JMFC - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4411 WP No. 22784 of 2024 court, holalkere, Chitradurga. (annexed vide Annexure-A and A1). b. Quash the order dated 27.04.2024 passed by the Hon'ble Sr Civil Judge and JMFC, Holalkere, Chitradurga in matter bearing Holalkere Police Station NC No.313/2024, wherein the Hon'ble Trial Court was pleased to pass orders under Section 155(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code directing registration of FIR the information received in matter bearing Holalkere Police Station NC No. 313/2024 and consequentially investigate the same for the offence punishable under Section 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act (Annexure B) c. Pass any order/s as deems fit to this Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice." 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the issue in the lis stands covered by the judgment rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.8395/2017 disposed on 06.06.2018, wherein it has held as follows: "Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned SPP-II, appearing for the Respondent-State. Perused the records. 2. The petition is filed seeking quashing of registration of FIR in Crime No. 197/2017 and - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:4411 WP No. 22784 of 2024 further investigation thereon. The records disclose that, the Sub-Inspector of Cubbon Park Police Station, Bengaluru, has registered a case in NCR No.133/2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 79 & 80 of the Karnataka Police Act ( for short, ‘K.P. Act’) and after obtaining permission from the Magistrate, he started investigation for the above said offences. The records also disclose that, the said permission appears to have been granted. Even considering that the permission being granted by the Magistrate, it appears it is after the Police Officer receiving credible information with regard to the above said offences and going to the spot and after conducting investigation to some extent, thereafter permission was obtained. The learned Magistrate has simply granted permission by mentioning a single word ‘Permitted’. There is no application of mind to the contents of the complaint or to the report submitted by the Police Officer and no satisfaction of the Magistrate is recorded before permitting for investigation. Even the learned Magistrate has not mentioned the time at which permission has been taken and as to whether it is before or after starting-up of investigation. 3. At this stage, it is worth to mention here the observation made by this court in Crl.P 3082/2007 dated 22.10.2008 at Para-9, which reads as under:- - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:4411 WP No. 22784 of 2024 “Even otherwise a perusal of the order of the Judge, which is in manuscript written over the representation by the Sub- Inspector of Police, does not disclose application of mind. As noticed supra, the JMFC ought to have applied his mind to the facts, satisfied himself as to whether there are reasonable grounds to believe that a non-cognizable offence is committed and having not done so, the act is both, arbitrary and capricious" Therefore, it goes without saying that before permitting for investigation, the Magistrate has to go through the contents of the report submitted by the Police Officer and record his satisfaction with regard to the grounds to believe that non- cognizable offence is committed and it requires investigation by the police and thereafter, he has to permit the police to investigate the matter. Such things are not there, sofar as this case is concerned, except mentioning in a word ‘Permitted”. It appears that the Magistrate has not applied his judicious mind before passing such an order. 4. One more thing required to be considered by this court is that, the Police Officer has stated in the complaint that, on 12.09.2017, one Mr. Prakash, the Police Officer (Special Investigation Team) has appeared before the Sub-Inspector of Police, Cubbon Park, Bengaluru, and stated that he - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:4411 WP No. 22784 of 2024 has visited the Nota Royal Arcade No.158, Shop No.11 and 12, Ground Floor, Puradamma Recreation Associates which are the video game shops and he found that some people are playing Video Games with the help of machines. Except stating that, nothing has been stated in the said complaint as to whether the said game is a game of chance or a Game of skill and as to how it amounts to offence under Sections 79 & 80 of the K.P Act. Therefore, there is absolute no information with regard to the game being played as to whether it is a game of chance only or any skill is required. 5. In the above circumstances, there are serious lacunas in registration of case and investigation in connection of the said case concerned. Therefore, in my opinion, if such investigation ordered to be continued, it would amount to abuse of process of law. Hence, the same is liable to be quashed. However, the Jurisdictional Police are at liberty to follow the procedure under Section 155(2) of Cr.PC. properly and re-investigate the matter, if need arises, in accordance with law. With the above observation, the petition is disposed of." 4. In the light of the issue standing covered by judgment rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:4411 WP No. 22784 of 2024 supra, the petition stands disposed on the same terms." 5. In the instant case, material on record would indicate that no prior permission as mandatorily required under Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. was obtained by the respondent and as such, the impugned proceedings deserve to be quashed. 6. Hence, I pass the following: ORDER i) Writ Petition is hereby allowed. ii) Impugned proceedings in C.C.No.76/2024 on the file of MMTC-2 Bangalore for the offence punishable under Section 79 and 80 of K.P.Act, 1963 are hereby quashed. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE GPG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28 CT: BHK