- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2721 CRL.P No. 103151 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103151 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. MR. YAMANAPPA S/O. VITTAL GUNADAL AGE. 42 YEARS, R/O. RUDRASWAMI PETH, TQ. JAMKHANDI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587301. 2. MR. ASLAM S/O. ISMAIL INAMDAR, AGE. 26 YEARS, R/O. WARD NO.27, TALAWAR GALLI, HOSUR, RABAKAVI, TQ. BANAHATTI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587314. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MAQBOOLAHAMED M.PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH BANAHATTI PS, R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580011. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. T.HANUMAREDDY, AGA) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (528 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO, QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO.1593/2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BANAHATTI WHEREIN THE CHARGE SHEET IS FILED AGAINST THE PRESENT PETITIONERS FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 171H R/W 34 OF IPC (BANAHATTI PS CRIME NO.82/2023) IN SO FAR AS THE PRESENT PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2 ARE CONCERNED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.02.15 12:54:59 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2721 CRL.P No. 103151 of 2024 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioners have been charge-sheeted for the offence punishable under Section 171H read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). 2. The prosecution alleges that during the Assembly Elections – 2023, the petitioners were found wearing their party’s saffron T-shirt in a public place. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent/State. 4. The offence alleged against the petitioners is non- cognizable, and therefore, as per Section 155(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), prior permission from the Magistrate was required before conducting any investigation. 5. A perusal of the requisition sent to the Magistrate reveals that the learned Magistrate endorsed “permitted” on the requisition without recording any reasons. A Coordinate Bench of this Court, in Vaggeppa Gurulinga Jangaligi v. State of Karnataka, held that passing an “order” permitting the police to investigate a non-cognizable offence is an essential requirement under Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. The phrase “without the order of the Magistrate” in Section 155(2) indicates that the Magistrate must pass a reasoned order, rather than merely writing “permitted” on the police requisition. Such an endorsement cannot be equated with a legally valid order. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2721 CRL.P No. 103151 of 2024 6. In view of the above, the investigation conducted without a proper order from the Magistrate stands vitiated for non- compliance with Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. Consequently, the cognizance taken by the Magistrate is also vitiated. 7. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The impugned proceedings in C.C. No. 1593/2023, pending before the Civil Judge and JMFC, Banahatti, are hereby quashed. 8. Any pending applications stand disposed of accordingly. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE JTR Ct:vh List No.: 2 Sl No.: 10