IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH
RAJESH RAI K, J.
Ambranna S/o Channabasappa - Appellant
Versus
The State Of Karnataka - Respondent
Criminal Petition No.200854/2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
Decided on : 13-05-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. non-compliance with investigative procedures (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. arguments on fir registration and permissions (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. mandatory procedures under section 155 of cr.p.c. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. judicial precedents on non-cognizable offences (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. guidelines for magistrates in non-cognizable cases (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 6. violation of mandatory provisions leads to unsustainable proceedings (Para 16) |
| 7. court's ruling based on procedural defects (Para 17) |
| 8. order quashing criminal petition (Para 18) |
ORDER :
The petitioners are before this Court calling in question the proceedings in Crime No.16/2024, pending on the file of the Court of the Civil Judge and JMFC (Jn.Dn.), Shahapur, for the offences punishable under Sections 79 and 80 of the KARNATAKA POLICE ACT , 1963, on the ground of non-compliance of the mandatory requirements prescribed under Section 155 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. Heard Shri Ashok B. Mulage, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri Jamadar Shahabuddin, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State and perused the material on record.
3. The case of the prosecution is that, on 10.01.2024, respondent/Police under the instructions of PSI of respondent Police Station barged into the recreation club and disconnected the CCTV recorder and conducted raid, arrested persons who were involved in playing game of chance by placing bets. An amount of Rs.15,000/- along with other material objects were also seized. The Police registered a complaint in Crime No.16/2024 for the aforesaid offences on 07.02.2024. The matter was referred for investigation. The Police after investigation filed charge-sheet against the petitioners for the afore- quoted offences. The petitioners are arraigned as accused Nos.1 to 15.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that offences punishable under non-cognizable offences. On non-cognizable offences, FIR could not have been registered without at the outset express permission at the hands of the learned Magistrate and the entire process is violation of Section 155 (2) of Cr.P.C.
5. Learned HCGP appearing for respondent-State, however, submitted that the endorsement made by the learned Magistrate permitting the Police is sufficient compliance.
6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and perused the material on record.
7. It is not in dispute that the alleged offence punishable under Sections 79 and 80 of the K.P. Act is a non-cognizable offence. When the report is received by the SHO of Police Station in respect of commission of non- cognizable offence, the SHO has to follow the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 155 (1) and 155(2) of Cr.P.C. Therefore, it is necessary to refer the said provision. Section 155 of Cr.P.C., which deal with the procedure for investigation and for taking cognizance of non-cognizable offence, reads as follows:—
“155. Information as to non-cognizable cases and investigation of such cases-.
(1) When information is given to an officer in charge of a police station of the commission within the limits of such station of a non-cognizable offence, he shall enter or cause to be entered the substance of the information in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may prescribe in this behalf, and refer the informant to the Magistrate.
(2) No police officer shall investigate a non- cognizable case without the order of a Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial.
(3) Any police officer receiving such order may exercise the same powers in respect of the investigation (except the power to arrest without warrant) as an officer in charge of a police station may exercise in a cognizable case.
(4) Where a case relates to two or more offences of which at least one is cognizable, the case shall be deemed to be a cognizable case, notwit
Police cannot investigate non-cognizable offences without a prior order from the Magistrate, as per Section 155(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Prosecutorial proceedings for non-cognizable offences are invalid if the mandatory permission from a Magistrate is not obtained as stipulated in Sections 155(1) and (2) of the Cr.P.C.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.