- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30300 CRL.P No. 6324 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6324 OF 2019 BETWEEN: STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MOODABIDRE POLICE STATION, MANGALURU, REP BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE - 01. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. SOWMYA R., HCGP) AND: 1. SRI SHANTHI PRASAD HEGDE S/O SHRIDHAR HEGDE, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT KERDILA HOUSE, THODAR VILLAGE, MANGALURU TALUK-575 001. 2. SRI DENIS MENEZES S/O FRANCIS MENEZES, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT ADKIL PALKE HOUSE, THODAR VILLAGE, MANGALURU TALUK-575 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI P.P.HEGDE, SR. ADVOCATE FOR MS. SAMEEKSHA T.R., ADVOCATE AND SRI VENKATESH SOMAREDDI, ADV. FOR R1; R2 - SERVED) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 19.07.2018 PASSED IN Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30300 CRL.P No. 6324 of 2019 CRL.RP.NO.140/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.SESSIONS,D.K., MANGALURU THEREBY SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 19.08.2017 OF TAKING COGNIZANCE AND REGISTRATION OF CRIMINAL CASE AGAINST THE 1ST RESPONDENT BY THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MOODABIDRI IN C.C.NO.405/2017 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 323 AND 504 OF IPC AND DIRECT THE TRIAL COURT TO PROCEED WITH C.C.NO.405/2017 ON MERITS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL ORDER Challenging order dated 19.07.2018 passed by Principal Sessions Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangaluru, in Criminal Revision Petition no.140/2017 setting aside order dated 19.08.2017 passed by Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Moodabidri, in CC no.405/2017 taking cognizance of offences punishable under Sections 323 and 504 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC'), this petition is filed. 2. Smt.Sowmya, learned HCGP for petitioner (complainant) submitted that based on information by Denis Menezes - respondent no.2 alleging that respondent no.1 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30300 CRL.P No. 6324 of 2019 committed offences punishable under Sections 323 and 504 of IPC, NCR no.812/PTN/MDB/2017 was registered by Moodabidri Police, Mangaluru on 12.07.2017. Thereafter, Police sought permission of learned Magistrate to investigate matter. Same was endorsed by learned Magistrate with words "Permitted". Challenging same, respondent no.1 filed Criminal Revision Petition no.140/2017 before learned Sessions Court. Under impugned order, learned Sessions Judge proceeded to quash order dated 19.08.2017 taking cognizance of offence and registration of criminal case. Aggrieved thereby, present petition was filed. 3. It was submitted, reason cited by learned Sessions Judge that proper procedure was not followed by Police nor by learned Magistrate while taking cognizance of offences was contrary to law and unjustified and therefore, sought for allowing petition. 4. Sri P.P. Hegde, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Miss Sameeksha T.R. and Sri Venkatesh Somareddi, advocates for respondent no.1 opposed petition. It was submitted, admittedly, report submitted by complainant was for - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30300 CRL.P No. 6324 of 2019 offences punishable under Section 323 and 504 of IPC, which were non-cognizable in nature. As per Section 155 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('CrPC'), on receipt of report about non-cognizable offence, Police Officer was required to enter same in register and refer informant to learned Magistrate. Instead of following said procedure, an intimation was sent by Police to learned Magistrate on which, learned Magistrate endorsed "Permitted". It was submitted, even same would not be in compliance with directions issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Priyanka Srivastava v. State of Uttar Pradesh, reported in (2015) 6 SCC 287 and therefore submitted interference by learned Sessions Judge was fully justified and sought for dismissal. 5. Heard learned counsel, perused impugned order and material on record. 6. This petition is by State against order passed by learned Sessions Judge. Initiation of proceedings against respondent no.1 herein is indisputably on basis of NCR report submitted by respondent no.2 on 12.07.2017 for offences under Section 323 and 504 of IPC. Indisputably, both offences - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30300 CRL.P No. 6324 of 2019 are non-cognisable. Section 155 of CrPC mandates that on receipt of report of non-cognizable offence, Police Officer was required to note same in register and under Section 155 (1) of CrPC, refer informant to learned Magistrate. Instead of said procedure, on intimation by Police Officer about registration of NCR, learned Magistrate endorsed "Permitted" and based on same proceedings in CC no.405/2017 were registered. 7. While passing impugned order, learned Sessions Judge referred to Section 155 of CrPC and arrived at categorical finding about non-compliance with same. Apart from above, endorsement by learned Magistrate as "Permitted" would not meet requirements of law as laid down in Priyanka Srivastava's case. On both counts, impugned order would be fully justified. No grounds to interfere. Petition is without merit and it is dismissed. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE GRD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24