- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3601 CRL.P No. 103444 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 103452 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103444 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103452 OF 2024 IN CRL.P. NO.103444 OF 2024: BETWEEN: HANUMANTHA S/O. RAMASWAMY ELIGER AGE. 42 YEARS, OCC. FARMER, R/O. RAMPUR VILLAGE, TQ. KANAKAGIRI, DIST. KOPPAL-580024. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. V.P.VADAVI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY PSI KANAKAGIRI, TQ. AND DIST. KOPPAL, REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SPP, HIGH COURT PREMISES, DHARWAD-580011. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ASHOK T.KATTIMANI, AGA) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (528 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO, QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 29.11.2024 THEREBY TAKING COGNIZANCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 IN CC NO.2895/2023 (KANAKAGIRI P.S. CRIME NO.125/2023) PASSED BY THE ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, GANGAVATI FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 78(iii) OF KARNATAKA POLICE ACT 1963. IN CRL.P. NO.103452 OF 2024: BETWEEN: 1. HANUMANTHA S/O. RAMASWAMY ELIGER AGE. 41 YEARS, OCC. FARMER, Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.02.25 18:00:33 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3601 CRL.P No. 103444 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 103452 of 2024 R/O. RAMPUR VILLAGE, TQ. KANAKAGIRI, DIST. KOPPAL-580024 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. V.P.VADAVI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY PSI KANAKAGIRI, TQ. AND DIST. KOPPAL, R/BY ADDL. S.P.P., HIGH COURT PREMISES, DHARWAD-580011. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ASHOK T.KATTIMANI, AGA) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (528 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO, QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 05.06.2024 THEREBY TAKING COGNIZANCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 IN CC NO.91/2024 (KANAKAGIRI P.S. CRIME NO.165/2023) PASSED BY THE ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, GANGAVATI FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 78(iii) OF KARNATAKA POLICE ACT 1963. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondent/State. 2. The issues involved in these petitions are similar; therefore, they are taken up together, heard, and disposed of by this common order. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3601 CRL.P No. 103444 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 103452 of 2024 3. The petitioner/accused No.2, in both petitions, has been charge-sheeted for the offence punishable under Section 78(3) of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963 (KP Act). 4. The prosecution alleges that, upon receiving credible information that accused No.1 was engaged in matka gambling in a public place, the complainant, along with his staff and panch witnesses, went to the spot, apprehended accused No.1, and recovered some money, chits, and ball pens. In his confession statement, accused No.1 admitted that he used to hand over the money collected from the public to accused No.2. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent/State. 6. The allegation of playing matka is directed against accused No.1. Accused No.2 has been implicated solely on the basis of the confession statement of a co-accused. There is no material evidence to substantiate that accused No.2 was engaged in playing matka at the instance of accused No.1, except for the confession statement. It is a settled principle of law that any confession made by an accused while in police custody is inadmissible under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, unless supported by corroborative material. In the absence of such corroborative material, the petitioner cannot be prosecuted for the aforesaid offences. 7. The offence under Section 78 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963, is non-cognizable. As per Section 155 of the Code of - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3601 CRL.P No. 103444 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 103452 of 2024 Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), prior permission from the Magistrate is mandatory before conducting any search, seizure, or arrest. 8. In the present case, after conducting the raid and registering the FIR, the police approached the Magistrate seeking permission. The learned Magistrate, after reviewing the application, granted permission. Therefore, the investigation, which culminated in taking cognizance of the aforesaid offence, stands vitiated due to non-compliance with the mandatory provisions of Section 155(2) of the Cr.P.C. In such circumstances, the continuation of criminal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law. 9. Accordingly, the petitions are allowed. The impugned proceedings in CC No.91/2024 & CC No.2895/2023 on the file of Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Gangavathi, insofar as petitioner/accused No.2, in both petitions, are hereby quashed. Pending applications, if any, are disposed off as not surviving for consideration. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE JTR Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43