- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24002 CRL.P No. 8318 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8318 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. MR. SANCHIT SARAN S/O VISHAL SARAN, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/O NO. 405 AND 406, SITE NO.1 1ST CROSS ROAD, CRP LAYOUT, HARLUR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 102. 2. MR. SMRUTI RANJAN PATRA, S/O SANTOSH KUMAR PATRA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/O FLAT NO. 1211, 12TH FLOOR, SUN CITY GLORIA, BLOCK-2, WING-C, DODDAKANNELL, SARJAPUR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 035. 3. MRS. LIPIKA CHAWLA, D/O ASHOK CHAWLA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/O APARTMENT NO. 5803, WING-58, 4TH FLOOR, SOBHA DREAM ACRES, PANATHUR, BENGALURU - 560 103. 4. MR. HARSH SAHAY, S/O H.N. SAHAY, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24002 CRL.P No. 8318 of 2025 R/O FLAT NO. 5011, 1ST FLOOR, SOBHA DHALIA, GREN GLAN LAYOUT, BELLANDUR, BENGALURU - 560 103. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VIKRAM CHOUDHARY, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. BHARATH KUMAR V, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH POLICE STATION, SHANTHINAGARA - 560 027 REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTER, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. JOHN THALIATH S/O. THARIAN HORMISE THALIATH AGED 43 YEARS, R/A. NO.84/1, VAISHNAVI SOVEREIGN, GREEN GLEN LAYOUT, BELLANDUR, BANGALORE-560103. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.N. JAGADEESHA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. SANDEESH J. CHOUTA, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. CHINMAY J,, MIRJI, ADVOCATE FOR PROPOSED DE FACTO COMPLAINANT) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO A. QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 12.06.2025 (4 NOS) ISSUED TO THE PETITIONERS HEREIN, IN RELATION TO INVESTIGATION IN FIR BEARING NO.26/2025 REGISTERED WITH THE RESPONDENT POLICE (ANNEXURE A TO A3). - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24002 CRL.P No. 8318 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 1. In this petition, petitioners seek the following reliefs– “a) Quash the notice dated 12.06.2025 (4 Nos.) issued to the petitioners herein, in relation to investigation in FIR bearing No.26/2025 registered with the respondent Police (Annexure A to A3); b) Quash the Permission granted by the Hon’ble I Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru (if any), in relation to FIR bearing No.25/2025, as mentioned in the notice dated 12.06.2025 (4 Nos.) (Annexure A to A3).” 2. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that pursuant to a complaint dated 10.04.2025 registered as FIR in Crime No.26/2025, the Investigating Officer (IO) submitted a requisition dated 12.06.2025 before the learned Magistrate, who permitted the respondent to issue the impugned notices calling - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24002 CRL.P No. 8318 of 2025 upon the petitioners to appear before him on 13.06.2025, aggrieved by which the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. 3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would invite my attention to the impugned notices in order to point out that the same refer to an order passed by the learned Magistrate permitting the respondent to take steps including issuing impugned notices and submits that the said order is an illegal order and deserves to be set aside, as a consequence of which, the impugned notices will have to be quashed. 4. Per contra, the learned Additional S.P.P. has produced a copy of the permission/direction/order dated 12.06.2025 passed by the learned Magistrate, whereby he simply says “permitted” pursuant to the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24002 CRL.P No. 8318 of 2025 requisition dated 12.06.2025 submitted by the respondent /IO. 5. It is needless to state that except saying ‘permitted’, the said permission / direction / order which preceded the impugned notices is clearly a cryptic and non-speaking order without any application of mind and without assigning any reasons as to why the learned Magistrate was granting permission in favour of the IO to issue the impugned notices which deserve to be quashed / set aside on this ground alone and the matter be remitted back to the learned Magistrate for reconsideration of the requisition dated 12.06.2025 submitted by the IO afresh in accordance with law. 6. In the result, I proceed to pass the following – ORDER a. This Petition is hereby allowed. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24002 CRL.P No. 8318 of 2025 b. The impugned notices at Annexures-A1, A2 and A3 dated 12.06.2025 are hereby set aside. c. Matter is remitted back to the learned Magistrate for re-consideration of the requisition dated 12.06.2025 submitted by the IO afresh in accordance with law. All rival contentions on all aspects of the matter are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE HNM List No.: 5 Sl No.: 22 CT: BHK