Karnataka High Court
Prashantkumar vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 April, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2827
CRL.P No. 200271 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200271 OF 2024 (482)
BETWEEN:
PRASHANTKUMAR S/O BHIMRAYA REDDY
@ BHIMRAYA GOUDA,
AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE,
R/O H.NO. 5-1-226/4, BASAVESHWAR NAGAR,
CHIITAPUR ROAD, YADGIRI CITY-585223.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI RAJESH DODDAMANI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH
by KHAJAAMEEN SHAHAPUR POLICE STATION, SHAHAPUR,
L MALAGHAN NOW REPRESENTED BY,
Location: HIGH THE ADDL. SPP,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH-585103.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. ANITA M. REDDY, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO, ALLOW THIS PETITION AND QUASH
THE ORDER OF TAKING COGNIZANCE PASSED BY THE HON'BLE
PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SHAHAPUR VIDE ORDER
DATED 04-12-2023 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 79 AND 80 OF KARNATAKA POLICE ACT 1963
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2827
CRL.P No. 200271 of 2024
PASSED IN CC NO.5495/2023, NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF
THE HON'BLE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SHAHAPUR
IN CC NO. 5495/2023., IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO
PETITIONER/A-14 (AS PER CHARGE SHEET ) IS CONCERNED.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-
State.
2. The short point that arise for consideration in
this petition is whether the investigating officer had taken
the permission of the learned Magistrate under Section
155 (2) of Cr.P.C., prior to conducting any investigation.
The petitioner has sought for quashing of the proceedings
in Crime No.231/2023 of Shahapur Police Station on the
ground of want of permission to investigate the matter.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on
23.10.2023 then the PSI of Shahapur Police Station
received a credible information that a few persons were
playing Andar Bahar game which is game of cards
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2827
amounting to gambling. Therefore, he obtained
permission from the Dy.S.P. and along with his staff and
panchas went to the said spot and raided the spot and
caught hold of 14 persons, including the petitioner herein
and seized the money used for gambling as well as the
playing cards. He returned to the police station and along
with the spot mahazar, the accused No.1 to 14 and the
seized articles were handed over to the SHO, with his
complaint. It was registered in the above crime number
and investigation was conducted by the I.O. and a charge
sheet was laid after investigation.
4. The petitioner who is accused No.14 contend
that the alleged place of incident is a private place and the
investigation officer has not taken permission of the
learned Magistrate to investigate the matter as required
under Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. and as such, the entire
investigation is vitiated. He submits that the charge sheet
is filed against the petitioner is not sustainable under law
and therefore the charge sheet is liable to quash. In this
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2827
regard, he relies on the requirement of law as stated by
this Court in the case of Vaggeppa Gurulinga Jangaligi
V/s The State of Karnataka1. In the said judgment,
this Court has stated as below:
"Therefore, under Rule I, the Magistrate shall
endorse on the report whether the same has been
received by post or muddam. Under Rule 2, Magistrate
has to specify in his order the rank and designation of
the police officer or the police officer by whom the
investigation shall be conducted. Considering the
mandatory requirement of Section 155(1) and (2) of
Cr.P.C. and Rule 1 and 2 of Chapter V of the Karnataka
Criminal Rules Practice, this Court proceed to laid down
the following guidelines for the benefit of the judicial
Magistrate working in the State.
i) The Jurisdictional Magistrates shall stop hereafter
making endorsement as 'permitted' on the police
requisition itself. Such an endorsement is not an order in
the eyes of law and as mandated under Section 155(2)
of Cr.P.C.
ii) When the requisition is submitted by the informant to
the Jurisdictional Magistrate, he should make an
endorsement on it as to how it was received, either by
post or by Muddam and direct the office to place it before
him with a separate order sheet. No order should be
2020 (1) KCCR 371
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2827
passed on the requisition itself. The said order sheet
should be continued for further proceedings in the case.
iii) When the requisition is submitted to the Jurisdictional
Magistrate, he has to first examine whether the SHO of
the police station has referred the informant to him with
such requisition.
iv) The Jurisdictional Magistrate should examine the
contents of the requisition with his/her judicious mind
and record finding as to whether it is a fit case to be
investigated, if the Magistrate finds that it is not a fit
case to investigate, he/she shall reject the prayer made
in the requisition. Only after his/her subjective
satisfaction that there is a ground to permit the police
officer to take up the investigation, he/she shall record a
finding to that effect permitting the police officer to
investigate the non-cognizable offence.
v) In case the Magistrate passes the orders permitting
the investigation, he/she shall specify the rank and
designation of the Police Officer who has to investigate
the case, who shall be other than informant or the
complainant."
5. He also relies on the judgment of this Court in
the case of Eraiah and others V/s State of
Karnataka2. The game of Andar Bahar is a game of
1977(1) KLJ 274
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2827
chance and therefore the alleged offence complained of is
non cognizable in nature and it contemplates registering a
non cognizable case and obtaining permission of the
Magistrate under Section 155 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, the
above judgment of this Court are applicable and as such
the charge sheet is not sustainable under law.
Consequently, the petition deserves to be allowed. Hence,
the following:
ORDER
Petition is allowed.
The further proceedings in Crime No.231/2023 of
Shahapur Police Station on the file of Civil Judge & JMFC,
Shahapur are hereby quashed.
The investigating officer is at liberty to take a valid
permission from the concerned Magistrate and file the
charge sheet if he is advised so.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SMP
CT:PK
