- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34982 WP No. 23730 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 23730 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MR V S UGRAPPA, S/O SUBBIAH AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/AT NO.1093, 19TH CROSS, NEAR BDA COMPLEX, HSR LAYOUT, SECTOR-3 BENGALURU SOUTH BENGALURU-560102 2. MR DR. AJAY SINGH S/O DHARAM SINGH AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT NO.E/83, NELOGI, KALBURAGI NELOGI-585310 3. MR ALLAMPRABHU PATIL S/O SHARANAPPA GOUDA PATIL AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, M I G 18 MSK MILL ROAD, OPP BUS STAND,SHANTINAGARA KALBURAGI-585103 4. MR RIZWAN ULLAKHAN AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O ATAULLA KHAN R/AT NO.69, BAZAR STREET, NEELASANDRA, BANGALORE SOUTH BANGALORE-560051 5. MR ANITHA HARI RAO AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34982 WP No. 23730 of 2025 W/O HARI RAO R/AT NO.429, 14TH C CROSS, 2ND STAGE, 2ND PHASE, WEST OF CORD ROAD, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560086 6. MR SHAHIN SHARIFF W/O AFROZ AHMED AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/AT NO.74/A MACKAN STREET BHARATHI NAGAR THIMMAIAH ROAD CROSS BANGALORE-560001 7. MR H ANJANEYA S/O HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS. R/AT NO.2733, 3RD CROSS, HAL 3RD STAGE NEW TIPPASANDRA BENGALURU-560075 8. G S MANJUNATH C/O K. SANNAIAH AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT NO.18, SRINIVASA NILAYA NEAR BHUVANESHWARI CIRCLE MUNICIPAL COLONY, KELAGOTE CHITRADURGA-577501 9. MR K M HALASWAMY ALIAS K M HALESH S/O K H MAHADEVAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT C B ROAD, WARD-13, HOLALKERE CHITRADURGA DIST 577526 10. T PRAKASH S/O C THIMMANNA, AGED ABPIT 44 YEARS, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34982 WP No. 23730 of 2025 JAGAJEEVANA RAM COLONY, CHOWLUR KAVAL, CHITRADURGA-577538 11. MR M K TAJPEER AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, S/O ZAINULLABEDIN, R/AT NO HOLALKERE, BESIDE CHELUGUDDA, TMK PEER SAB COMPOUND, CHITRADURGA -577501 12. MR N D KUMAR S/O H NARASIMHALU, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT NO ALN NILAYA, TA RA SU NILAYA, KOTE ROAD, CHITRADURGA 577501 13. MR DALITH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, S/O NARASIMHAYYA KT HALLI, NIDAGAL HOBLI, PAVAGADA TALUK, KT HALLI, TUMKUR 572116 14. MRS. VIMALA W/O G.V. VENKATARAMANAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT NO.600/1, 2ND MAIN E-BLOCK,RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560010 15. MRS D V LAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, W/O SURESH S, R/AT NO 55, 4TH CROSS, KRISHNA MURTHY LAYOUT, THAVAREKERE, BANGALORE-560029 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34982 WP No. 23730 of 2025 16. MR SULOCHANA H V AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, W/O SURESH, R/AT NO.905, 25TH CROSS, 10TH A MAIN ROAD, NEAR POLICE STATION, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, PEMMEGOWDA ROAD, BANGALORE 560078 …PETITIONERS (BY SMT SARAH VERONICA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. DHANANJAYA C M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH POLICE INSPECTOR, WILSON GARDEN POLICE STATION BENGALURU CITY-560027 2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER WILSON GARDEN POLICE STATION, REP BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-560001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI THEJESH P. HCGP) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C NO. 25189 OF 2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF XLII ACJM, BENGALURU, INCLUDING THE ORDER OF COGNIZANCE DATED 25-07-2024, AND COMPLAINT REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE FOR ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 188, 290 IPC AND SECTION 103 OF KARNATAKA POLICE ACT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34982 WP No. 23730 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER The petitioners are before this Court seeking the following prayer: I. Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ and quash the entire proceedings in CC No.25189 of 2024 pending on the file of XLII ACJM, Bengaluru, including the order of cognizance dated 25-07-2024, and Complaint registered by the respondent Police for alleged offences punishable under Sections 188, 290 of IPC and Section 103 of Karnataka Police Act in the interest of justice (produced at Annexures A, B respectively). II Grant such other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice. 2. The petitioners have been charged with the commission of offences under Section 103 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1961 (for short ‘KP Act’) and Sections 188 and 290 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’). - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34982 WP No. 23730 of 2025 3. It has been alleged that the petitioners had protested against the policy of the Government outside the designated protest zone, in spite of prohibitory orders in force, and thereby committed the offences punishable under the aforementioned Sections. 4. It is further submitted that the main offence being under Section 188 IPC, the offences under Section 290 IPC and Section 103 of the KP Act are only consequential offences and under the given facts and circumstances of the case, they can be sustained only if the offence under Section 188 IPC is legally maintainable. 5. It is further submitted that an offence committed under Section 188 of IPC can be taken cognizance only when a private complaint is lodged by the Competent Officer as envisaged under Section 195(1)(a) of Cr.P.C., and the same has not been followed in the instant case. It is further submitted that when the offence under Section 188 of IPC itself fails, the consequential offence under Sections 290 of IPC and 103 of KP Act also cannot stand. It is also contended that a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in identical facts and - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34982 WP No. 23730 of 2025 circumstances of the case, has quashed the entire proceedings against the accused therein. Reliance is placed on the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WP No.24699/2024 disposed on 12.09.2024. On the said grounds, it is prayed that the writ petition should be allowed. 6. The learned HCGP has not been able to contravene any of the submissions made hereinabove. 7. In WP No. 24699/2024, in paragraphs 4 and 5, it has been held as under: 4. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the aforesaid judgment has quashed the proceedings on identical offences against the other accused, wherein it has held as follows: "2. Learned Sr. Advocate Mr.Aruna Shyam appearing for the petitioners submits that the cognizance of the offence could not have been taken by the court below, the private complaint filed u/s 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for the subject offence itself being incompetent. In support of this, he banks upon of a Coordinate Bench decision in W.P.No.13328/2018 (GM-RES) between SRI. RAJASHEKHARANANDA SWAMIJI AND ANOTHER vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA, disposed off on 18.6.2021. He further submits that the provisions of Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 having been held mandatory by the Apex Court in SALONI ARORA V. STATE (NCT OF DELHI), (2017) 3 SCC 286, the quashment has to be granted by this court. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34982 WP No. 23730 of 2025 3. Learned Addl. SPP appearing for the respondent opposes the petitions contending that there can be delegation of power to lodge the complaint and therefore, in such an event, the author who promulgated the order in question need not go before the court to complain. Even otherwise, according to him, the arguable infirmity not going to root of the matter, no relief can be granted to the petitioners, as prayed for. So contending, he seeks dismissal of the petitions. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Petition Papers, this court is inclined to grant relief to the petitioners, broadly agreeing with the submission made on their behalf. Similar question had cropped up before the Coordinate Bench in Rajashekharananda Swamiji supra. A paragraphs 8 & 10 of the judgement, it is observed as under: “8. Reading of the above provision makes it clear that to take cognizance there should be a written complaint and such complaint should be filed either by the officer issuing such promulgation order or the officer above his rank. In the case on hand, as per the complaint itself, prohibitory order under Section 144 of IPC was promulgated by the Commissioner of Police and not the complainant. 10. Then the question is Annexures-A to D get vitiated only so far as the offence under Section 188 of IPC. In para 8 of the judgment in State of Karnataka v. Hemareddy1, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as follows: “8. We agree with the view expressed by the learned Judge and hold that in cases where in the course of the same transaction an offence for which no complaint by a Court is necessary under Section 195(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and an offence for which a complaint of a Court is necessary under that sub-section, are committed, it is not possible to split up and hold - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34982 WP No. 23730 of 2025 that the prosecution of the accused for the offences not mentioned in Section 195(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure should be upheld.” (Emphasis supplied)” The above observations come to the aid of petitioners. 5. The vehement submission of learned Addl. SPP that there can be delegation of “power to complain” in terms of promulgated order in question, is bit difficult to countenance in the absence of such delegation being demonstrated from the text of the said order itself. It has been a settled position of law vide In Re Delhi Laws Act, 1951 SCC OnLine SC 45 that a delegate cannot further delegate: delegatus non potesta potestas delegare. Contra having not been shown, the contention of the kind cannot be countenanced. In view of the above, these petitions being meritorious are allowed to meet the ends of justice and to prevent the abuse of process of the court; the impugned proceedings in C.C.No.24636/2022 pending on the file of learned VI Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, are quashed." 5. In the light of the orders passed by the Co- ordinate Bench and that of this Court and for the reasons aforementioned, the following: ORDER (i) The petition is allowed. (ii) Proceedings pending in C.C.No.25189/2024 and Private Complaint bearing No 9858/2022 dated 22.6.2022 before the 29th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34982 WP No. 23730 of 2025 and which was subsequently transferred to 42nd Additional (Spl Court Trial Cases filed against sitting a well as former MP's and MLA, triable by Magistrate in the State of Karnataka) stand quashed qua the petitioners. 8. In the light of the order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WP No. 24699/24 and also in the light of the undisputed submissions made by the petitioners as mentioned above, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The criminal petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned Proceedings pending in C.C. No. 25189/2024 on the file of 42nd Additional C.M.M. Court, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 188 and 290 of IPC and Section 103 of Karnataka Police Act, in so far as it relates to the petitioners herein is concerned, is set aside. [ Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE SMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14