SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Kar) 522

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU 
S.R. Krishna Kumar, J.
Smt.Lakshmi R. Hebbalkar - Petitioner
Versus
State of Karnataka Kakati Police Station Belagavi, Represented By The State Public Prosecutor and Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Petition No. 3070 of 2024 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)
Decided On : 13-06-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Sri. Gangadhar S. Hosakeri, Advocate
For the Respondent: Sri. Jagadeesha B. N., Addl. Spp

Investigations for non-cognizable offences require explicit permission from the Magistrate, and failure to adhere to this requirement renders the proceedings invalid.

Headnote:(A) Representation of the People Act, 1951 - Section 127A - Non-cognizable offence requiring Magistrate's permission for investigation - Petitioner sought to quash proceedings in C.C.No.4210/2024 for failure to obtain proper permission before investigation - Court emphasized the mandatory nature of Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. regarding non-cognizable offences. (Paras 1-8)

(B) Procedural irregularities - The Court detailed that mere endorsement of 'permitted' by the Magistrate on requisition does not satisfy legal requirements for conducting investigations into non-cognizable offences and renders proceedings unsustainable. (Para 7)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner faced allegations under Section 127A for improper conduct related to election pamphlets. No proper permission from the Magistrate for investigation was obtained, thereby invalidating the complaint.

Findings of Court:
The criminal petition was allowed, resulting in the quashing of proceedings in C.C.No.4210/2024.

Issues: The main issue was the validity of initiated proceedings for a non-cognizable offence without proper Magistrate's approval.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that strict adherence to procedural mandates under Section 155 of Cr.P.C. is necessary, asserting that investigations for non-cognizable offences without prior Magistrate permission are illegal.

Result: Criminal petition allowed; proceedings quashed.

Table of Content
1. arguments about permission for investigation necessity. (Para 2 , 4)
2. petitioner seeks quashing of criminal proceedings. (Para 3)
3. court's analysis of previous judgments on non-cognizable offences. (Para 5 , 6)
4. ratios on illegality of investigations without proper permission. (Para 7 , 8)

ORDER :

S.R. Krishna Kumar, J.

In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

Hence, the petitioner most humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to quash the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.4210/2024 pending before the Hon’ble (ACMM-42) XLII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru (Special Court for Trial of Cases against sitting as well as former MPs/MLAs, Triable by Magistrate in the State of Karnataka), for the offence punishable U/Sec. 127-A of RP Act, as against the petitioner herein, who is arrayed as Accused No.2, in the interest of justice and equity.”

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional SPP for respondent No.1 and perused the material on record.

3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that respondent No.2 filed the instant complaint against the petitioner on 06.05.2023 for the alleged offences punishable under Section 127 -A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (for short “the said Act of 1951”), which is a non-cognizable offence requiring necessary permission/approval from the learned Magistrate before conducting investigation.

4. Under identical circumstances, in the case of Sri. K.C.mPuttasiddasetty Vs. State of Karnataka and another – Crl.P.No.6396/2022 dated 09.06.2023, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court held as under:

“The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer:

WHEREFORE, the Petitioner named above most humbly prays that, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass an order, quashing the entire proceedings in C.C.No.313/2019 (in Crime No.61/2019 of Kollegala Town P.S., Chamarajanagara) registered for the offence punishable u/s. 127A of the Representation of People Act, pending on the file of the Learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Kollegala, in the interest of Justice."

2. The allegation against the petitioner is one punishable under Section 127A of the Representation of People Act, 1950 (for brevity 'the Act'). Section 127A of the Act reads as follows:

"Section 127A. Restrictions on the printing of pamphlets, posters, etc.—

[Restrictions on the printing of pamphlets, posters, etc. (1) No person shall print or publish or cause to be printed or published, any election pamphlet or poster which does not bear on its fact the names and addresses of the printer and the publisher thereof.

(2) No person shall print or cause to be printed any election pamphlet or poster—

(a) unless a declaration as to the identity of the publisher thereof, signed by him and attested by two persons to whom he is personally known, is delivered by him to the printer in duplicate; and

(b) unless, within a reasonable time after the printing of the document, one copy of the declaration is sent by the printer, together with one copy of the document.

(i) where it is printed in the capital of the State, to the Chief Electoral Officer; and

(ii) in any other case, to the district magistrate of the district in which it is printed.

(3) For the purposes of this section,—

(a) any process for multiplying copies of a document, other than copying it by hand, shall be deemed to be printing and the expression “printer” shall be construed accordingly; and

(b) “election pamphlet or poster” means any printed pamphlet, hand-bill or other document distributed for the purpose of promoting or prejudicing the election of a candidate or group of candidates or any placard or poster having reference to an election, but does not include any hand-bill, placard or poster merely announcing the date, time, place and other particulars of an election meeting or routine instructions to election agents or workers.

(4) Any person who contravenes any of the provisions of sub-section (

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top