- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35678 CRL.P No. 11024 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11024 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. SRI GAVISIDDAPPA @ GAVISIDDAPPA .S.D AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS S/O T B MUNEGOWDA R/AT 9/10, 1ST MAIN APPAJAPPA LAYOUT, NEAR SAI MANDIR SHAMPURA, ARABIC COLLEGE POST BENGALURU-560045. (AS PER THE AADHAR CARD) 2. SMT. RINKU @ RINKU MATHAPPAN AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS W/O THOMAS PHILIP R/AT FLAT NO.002 SLV ENCLAVE, NEAR SLV ROYAL ASHWATH NAGAR DR. SHIVARAMA KARANTH NAGAR BANGALORE-560077 (AS PER THE AADHAR CARD) 3. SMT. ANITHA PRASAD AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS W/O J. PRASAD R/AT NO.209, 15TH CROSS 2ND MAIN ROAD, RMV 2ND STAGE BANGALORE-560094 (AS PER THE AADHAR CARD) 4. DR. J PRASAD Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35678 CRL.P No. 11024 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS S/O O JAYARAJ R/AT NO.209, 15TH CROSS 2ND MAIN ROAD, RMV 2ND STAGE BANGALORE-560094 (AS PER THE AADHAR CARD) …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. AKSHAY RAMACHANDRA HUDDAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HEBBAL POLICE STATION REP. BY. SPP OFFICE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-01. 2. KAVITHA SARWESH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS CHAIRPERSON UDAY VIDYA KENDRA GOUTHAM COLLEGE OF PHARMACY KANAKANAGAR, BANGALORE-560032 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO.40063/2024 FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 441, 443, 445 AND 447 OF THE IPC, 1860 PENDING ON THE FILE OF VIII ADDL.CJM, BENGALURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FRESH MATTERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35678 CRL.P No. 11024 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER This petition is filed seeking to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.40063/2024 pending on the file of VIII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru for the offence punishable under Sections 441, 443, 445, 447 of IPC. 2. Prima facie, it appears that the learned Magistrate, while taking cognizance against the petitioner, did not advert to the 'B' report submitted by the Investigating Officer. 3. On a preliminary consideration, this Court is of the view that the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate appears to have been recorded without properly considering the contents of the 'B' report. The learned Magistrate has neither rejected the 'B' report by a reasoned and detailed order, nor does the order taking cognizance indicate that such rejection has occurred. The procedure adopted in taking cognizance Page no.3 is Re-typed and Re-placed vide Court Order dated 12.01.2026 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35678 CRL.P No. 11024 of 2025 is, therefore, prima facie flawed, and the order cannot be said to be legally sustainable. 4. It is well settled in numerous judgments of this Court that where an Investigating Officer, upon completion of investigation, submits a 'B' report, the Magistrate, before entertaining any protest memo or initiating proceedings, must carefully consider the 'B' report and pass a reasoned order either accepting or rejecting it. Unless the 'B' report is formally rejected, the Magistrate does not have the authority to entertain a protest memo or proceed further. In the present case, the learned Magistrate has clearly not followed this procedure. The cognizance recorded without consideration or rejection of the 'B' report is therefore fundamentally flawed, illegal, and vitiated by procedural infirmity. 5. At this stage, learned HCGP has submitted that the appropriate course would be to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35678 CRL.P No. 11024 of 2025 learned Magistrate for reconsideration of the 'B' report submitted by the Investigating Officer. 6. Considering that the proper procedure has not been followed and that the impugned order does not indicate that the learned Magistrate adverted to the 'B' report, this Court finds that the order taking cognizance suffers from serious legal infirmities. Accordingly, the impugned order is liable to be quashed and set aside. 7. For the foregoing reasons, this Court passes the following: ORDER (i) The petition is allowed. (ii) The order dated 27.11.2024 taking cognizance is hereby quashed and set aside. (iii) The matter is remitted to the learned Magistrate to reconsider the 'B' report and pass an appropriate reasoned order either accepting or rejecting it. Page no.5 is Re-typed and Re-placed vide Court Order dated 12.01.2026 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35678 CRL.P No. 11024 of 2025 (iv) The learned Magistrate shall notify the parties and, after due consideration, pass orders on the 'B' report. The subsequent course of action shall depend on the nature of the order passed by the learned Magistrate on the 'B' report. (v) All other contentions of the parties are kept open. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE ALB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 83