- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8101 CRL.P No. 102180 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102180 OF 2025 (482 OF Cr.PC/528 OF BNSS) BETWEEN: 1. MANJUNATH S/O. PAKIRAPPPA RATHOD, AGED: 28 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: LAMBANI TANADA, GAJENDRAGAD, DIST: GADAG-582114. 2. SMT. LAXMAVVA W/O. BADDAPPA MALOTTAR, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLDWORK, R/O: LAMBANI TANADA, GAJENDRAGAD, DIST: GADAG-582114. …PETITIONERS (BY SHRI ROHIT S. PATIL, ADV. FOR SHRI SHRIKANT T. PATIL, ADV.) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, R/BY GAJENDRAGAD POLICE SATION, DIST: GADAG. Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8101 CRL.P No. 102180 of 2025 R/BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, AT DHARWAD-580011. 2. SADASHIV S/O. VASANT KADAM, CPC-1217, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: POLICE OFFICER, R/O. GAJENDRAGAD POLICE STATION, GAJENDRAGAD, DIST: GADAG-582114. R/BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, AT DHARWAD-01. …RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. (528 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR/CHARGE SHEET IN CRIME NO.0192/2023 (P.S. GAJENDRAGAD) AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AGAINST THE PETITIONERS FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 78(3) OF KARNATAKA POLICE (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2021 IN C.C NO.24/2024 ON THE FILE OF PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC RON AT GADAG IN SO FAR AS PETITIONERS HEREIN-ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2 IS CONCERNED, IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8101 CRL.P No. 102180 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) Heard Sri Rohit S. Patil learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri Abhishek Malipatil, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondents. 2. This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“Cr.P.C.” for short) by the petitioners – accused Nos.1 and 2 praying to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.24/2024 (Crime No.0192/2023 of Gajendragad Police Station), pending on the file of learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Ron, Gadag District, for the offence punishable under Section 78(3) of the Karnataka Police (Amendment) Act, 2021 (“K.P.Act” for short). 3. The brief facts of the case of prosecution are that, on 11.12.2023 at 5:30 p.m, the Police Sub-Inspector, Gajendragad Police Station received a credible information that, one Manjunath was engaged in Mataka gambling at Sevalal Galli of Gajendragad inviting the general public that for Rs.1, he would pay Rs.80/-. Therefore, the first informant - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8101 CRL.P No. 102180 of 2025 along with the sub-staff and panchas conducted raid on the petitioners between 6:45 and 7:45 p.m. and hence, the Station House Officer, Gajendragad Police Station, has registered a case in Crime No.192/2023 for the offence punishable under Section 78(3) of K.P.Act. This led to registration of FIR and investigation. Taking exception to the same, the petitioners have filed this petition. 4. The petitioners have stated that the complaint is misconceived and the alleged offence is a non cognizable one. Under the provisions of Cr.P.C., the police have no authority to investigate the crime and the police have not complied with mandatory requirements of Section 155(1) of Cr.P.C. It is contended that when the officer-in-charge of police station receives an information regarding commission of a non-cognizable offence, he shall enter the same in a book to be maintained by the said officer and refer the informant to the magistrate. 5. It is contended that as per Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C., no police officer shall investigate a non-cognizable offence without the order of the Magistrate having power to - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8101 CRL.P No. 102180 of 2025 try such case or to commit such case for trial. But there is no iota of evidence to show that the above requirements are complied with in the present case and there is no speaking order by the jurisdictional Magistrate for permitting the police to take up the investigation. Therefore, the proceedings initiated against the petitioners in the charge sheet are liable to be quashed. 6. Learned High Court Government Pleader submitted that the jurisdictional Magistrate has permitted the concerned police officer to take up the investigation and therefore, there is compliance of Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. 7. It is not in dispute that the alleged offence under Section 78(3) of K.P.Act is a non-cognizable one and when the report is received by the SHO of the police station in respect of commission of non-cognizable offence, the SHO has to follow the mandatory requirement of Sections 155(1) and 155(2) of Cr.P.C. Sections 155(1) and (2) of Cr.P.C. read as under:- “155. Information as to non-cognizable cases and investigation of such cases.- (1) When - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8101 CRL.P No. 102180 of 2025 information is given to an officer in charge of a police- station of the commission within the limits of such station of a non-cognizable offence, he shall enter in a book to be kept as aforesaid the substance of such information and refer the informant to the Magistrate. (2) No police officer shall investigate a non- cognizable case without the order of a Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial.” 8. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid proposition of law, it is the duty of the police officer to enter the substance of information in the prescribed book and refer the informant to the magistrate as required under Section 155(1) of Cr.P.C. and thereafter the jurisdictional magistrate is required to pass an order permitting the police officer to investigate the case as required under Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. Therefore, unless the police officer is permitted by the Magistrate in an order to investigate the non-cognizable offence, the police officer does not get jurisdiction to investigate the matter and file a final report or the charge sheet. 9. This Court in the case of Vaggeppa Gurulinga Jangaligi (Jangalagi) vs. The State of Karnataka - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8101 CRL.P No. 102180 of 2025 reported in ILR 2020 KAR 630, considering non- compliance of mandatory provisions of Section 155(1) and (2) of Cr.P.C., has held as under: "20. Therefore, under Rule 1, the Magistrate shall endorse on the report whether the same has been received by post or muddam. Under Rule 2, Magistrate has to specify in his order the rank and designation of the police officer or the police officer by whom the investigation shall be conducted. Considering the mandatory requirement of Section 155(1) and (2) of Cr.P.C. and Rule 1 and 2 of Chapter V of the Karnataka Criminal Rules Practice, this Court proceed to laid down the following guidelines for the benefit of the judicial Magistrate working in the State. i) The Jurisdictional Magistrates shall stop hereafter making endorsement as 'permitted' on the police requisition itself. Such an endorsement is not an order in the eyes of law and as mandated under Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. ii) When the requisition is submitted by the informant to the Jurisdictional Magistrate, he should make an endorsement on it as to how it was received, either by post or by Muddam and direct the office to place it before him with a separate order sheet. No order should be passed on the requisition itself. The said order sheet should be continued for further proceedings in the case. iii) When the requisition is submitted to the Jurisdictional Magistrate, he has to first examine whether the SHO of the police station has referred the informant to him with such requisition. iv) The Jurisdictional Magistrate should examine - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8101 CRL.P No. 102180 of 2025 the contents of the requisition with his/her judicious mind and record finding as to whether it is a fit case to be investigated, if the Magistrate finds that it is not a fit case to investigate, he/she shall reject the prayer made in the requisition. Only after his/her subjective satisfaction that there is a ground to permit the police officer to take up the investigation, he/she shall record a finding to that effect permitting the police officer to investigate the non-cognizable offence. v) In case the Magistrate passes the orders permitting the investigation, he/she shall specify the rank and designation of the Police Officer who has to investigate the case, who shall be other than informant or the complainant." 10. In view of the mandatory requirements stated in Sections 155(1) and 155(2) of Cr.P.C. and the ratio laid down in the case stated supra, the SHO of a police station has no authority unless the jurisdictional Magistrate permits him for investigation of a non-cognizable offence. Whereas, in the instant case, the learned Magistrate has passed an order on the requisition submitted by the SHO of the police station by writing the words as “permitted” and at page No.43, the Magistrate passed an order. But, learned Magistrate has not examined the contents of requisition made by the first informant. It appears that learned Magistrate has not applied his mind judiciously and there is - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8101 CRL.P No. 102180 of 2025 no application of judicious mind in permitting the police officer to take up the investigation for a non-cognizable offence. Therefore, the SHO of a police station if received a complaint from the PSI and in turn, the SHO has to submit a requisition to the jurisdictional Magistrate seeking permission to investigate an offence punishable under Section 78(3) of the K.P.Act, which is a non-cognizable offence. 11. It shows that the respondent - police had no authority to investigate the matter. Under these circumstances, the proceedings initiated against the petitioners - accused Nos.1 and 2 by the learned Magistrate requires to be quashed. Under these circumstances, the proceedings initiated against the petitioners by the learned Magistrate requires to be quashed. Accordingly, the Court passes the following: - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8101 CRL.P No. 102180 of 2025 ORDER (i) The criminal petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The proceedings initiated against the petitioners for the offence punishable under Section 78(3) of the K.P.Act in C.C.No.24/2024 pending on the file of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Ron, Gadag District, in so far as petitioners – accused Nos.1 and 2 are concerned are quashed. Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE EM /CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8