- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9837 CRL.P No. 12117 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ CRIMINAL PETITION NO.12117 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. MR. RADHAKRISHNA RAI S/O BALAKRISHNA RAI, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O. NO.13, A WING, VNR MANSIONS, BANASWADI, BENGALURU-560 043 (ADDRESS SHOWN IN FINAL REPORT) R/O. NO.2-36, AGALPADI, SULYA TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA-574 212 R/O. NO.2-158, CHAWADI HOUSE, KADABA POST, KUTRUPADI VILLAGE, PUTTUR TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA-574 212. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BHARATH KUMAR V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER, Digitally signed by VARSHA N RASALKAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9837 CRL.P No. 12117 of 2025 CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH, WOMAN AND NARCOTICS SQUAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. POLICE INSPECTOR, (SATHISH M.H.) CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH, WOMAN AND NARCOTICS SQUAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU, STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.R. PATIL., HCGP FOR R1 & R2 ) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR BEARING NO.611/2014 DATED 28.08.2014 REGISTERED BY THE KORAMANGALA POLICE STATION AND SUBSEQUENTLY TRANSFERRED FOR INVESTIGATION AT THE HANDS OF RESPONDENT NO.1 POLICE, AT THE BEHEST OF THE INFORMATION DATED 28.08.2014 MADE BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 QUA THE PETITIONER ALONE; WHEREIN, THE PETITIONER HEREIN ARRAIGNED AS ACCUSED NO.3 FOR ALLEGED OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 188, 370(3), 370(A), 294 AND 109 OF IPC., READ WITH SECTION 35 OF THE KARNATAKA EXCISE ACT (ANNEXURE-A), ETC. THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9837 CRL.P No. 12117 of 2025 ORAL ORDER 1. The Petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: "a) Quash the FIR bearing No.611/2014 dated 28.08.2014 registered by the Koramangala Police Station and subsequently transferred for investigation at the hands of Respondent No.1 police, at the behest of the information dated 28.08.2014 made by the Respondent No.2 qua the Petitioner alone; wherein, the Petitioner herein is arraigned as Accused No.3 for alleged offences under Section 188, 370(3), 370(A), 294 and 109 of IPC R/w Section 35 of the Karnataka Excise Act (Annexure A), b) Quash the final report preferred by the Respondent No.1 Koramangal Police Station in matter bearing FIR/ Crime No.611/2014 currently re-numbered as matter bearing SC No.1591/2023 qua the Petitioner alone, pending on the file of Hon'ble LXXI Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru (CCH 72) wherein the Petitioner herein are arraigned as Accused No.3 for the alleged offences under section 188, 370(3), 370(A), 294 and 109 of IPC R/w 35 of the Karnataka Excise Act. c) Quash the entire proceedings in matter bearing SC.No.1591/2023, pending on the file of Hon'ble LXXI Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru (CCH-72), qua the Petitioner alone; wherein the Petitioner herein is arraigned as Accused No.3 for the offences under Section 188, 370(3), 370(A), 294 and 109 of IPC R/w Section 35 of the Karnataka Excise Act. d) Grant such other relief that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts of the present matter." - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9837 CRL.P No. 12117 of 2025 2. The sole ground of attack of the proceedings initiated against the petitioner by learned counsel for the petitioner is that a raid had been conducted without an FIR having been registered. 3. In that regard, reliance has been placed on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court dated 22.09.2016 in Criminal Petition No.5802/2016, more particularly, para 5 thereof, which is reproduced hereunder for easy reference: 5. Given the above circumstances of the case, it is well established that in such circumstances, the question of preliminary investigation or inquiry without registering FIR or any such raid being conducted without registering FIR would be illegal and would vitiate the proceedings. 4. And the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court dated 28.06.2022 in Criminal Petition No.7589/2019, more particularly, para 7 thereof, which is reproduced hereunder for easy reference: 7. The offences alleged against the petitioners are cognizable. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Lalitha Kumari’s case has held that conducting an investigation into an offence after registration of FIR under Section 154 of Code of Criminal procedure is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9837 CRL.P No. 12117 of 2025 the procedure established by law and thus is in conformity with Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the right of the accused under Article 21 of the Constitution is protected, if the FIR is registered first and then the investigation is conducted in accordance with the provisions of law. In the present case, no explanation is offered stating that due to exigency the FIR was not registered before conducting the raid. Hence the registration of FIR after conducting the raid is not permissible in law. Accordingly, I pass the following ORDER i) Criminal petition is allowed. ii) The impugned proceeding in S.C.No.563/2018 pending on the file of XLV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru city is hereby quashed. 5. In both the above judgments, the Co-ordinate Benches of this Court have categorically held that a raid cannot be conducted without an FIR having been registered. In the present matter, as is clear, the information as regards the offence was received on 26.08.2014 and a raid had been conducted at 08.00 p.m. on 27.08.2014. But the complaint was taken on record on 28.08.2014 and a FIR registered on 28.08.2014 at 05.45 a.m. The raid conducted at 8.00 p.m. on 27.08.2014 is prior to the FIR being - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9837 CRL.P No. 12117 of 2025 registered. Hence, the above actions on the part of the investigating officer fall foul of the decisions which have been referred to supra, providing that benefit to the petitioner in the present case also. 6. On enquiry with the learned HCGP, learned HCGP submits that now, the investigating officers register the FIR first and carry out the investigation subsequently. In that view of the matter, I pass the following ORDER. i) Criminal petition is allowed ii) FIR in Crime No.611/2014 dated 28.08.2014 registered by the Koramangala Police Station and subsequently transferred to respondent No.1, insofar as the petitioner is concerned, is quashed. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE KTY List No.: 2 Sl No.: 62