IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 448 OF 2026 BETWEEN: ANAND C., S/O CHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS NO.55, 3^RD MAIN, 2^ND CROSS KASTURIBANAGAR, MYSURU ROAD BENGALURU CITY, KARNATAKA – 560 026.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI MOHAN KUMARA D., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BYATARAYANAPURA POLICE STATION Digitally REPRESENTED BY ITS signed by STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR NAGAVENI Location: H igh HIGH COURT COMPLEX Court of BENGALURU – 01.

Karnataka

2. POLICE INSPECTOR SPECIAL ENQUIRY SQUAD CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH BENGALURU CITY – 01.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B.N.JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP FOR R1)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF THE CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.7 BY THE LEARNED XLVI ADDL CMM BENGALURU CITY IN C.C.NO.22731/2021 FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S/ 188 OF IPC AND SEC.51(B) OF NDM ACT 2005 AND SEC.79 AND 80 OF KARNATAKA POLICE ACT REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT BYATARAYANAPURA POLICE BENGALURU IN CR.NO.159/2021.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

ORAL ORDER

Petitioner – accused No.7 is before this Court calling in question proceedings in C.C.No.22731/2021, pending before the XLVI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City, for the offences under Section 188 of the IPC, Section 51(b) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 and Sections 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963.

2. Heard Sri Mohan Kumara D., learned counsel for petitioner and Sri B.N.Jagadeesha, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for the respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue in the lis stands answered by an order passed by the coordinate bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.1832/2025, disposed on 25.02.2025.

4. The coordinate bench in Crl.P.No.1832/2025 has held as follows:

“4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would reiterate the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, in order to point out apart from the fact that the trial Court passed the impugned order dated 09.10.2020 taking cognizance without assigning any reason and by passing a cryptic, laconic and unreasoned order without any application of mind. The game, which was allegedly played by the petitioners being a 'Game of Darts', which is essentially and predominantly a 'Game of Skill' and not a 'Game of Chance', the petitioners could not be incriminated for the aforesaid offences under Sections 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act as held by this Court in the following judgments:

(i) Sri Manjunath E and others vs. State of Karnataka - Crl.P.No.8396/2017;

(ii) Sri Hasan Raj and others vs. State of Karnataka - Crl.P.No.8395/2017; and (iii) M/s. Legends Culture Association (R) and another vs. State of Karnataka -

Crl.P.No.8981/2024.

It is, therefore, submitted that the impugned proceedings deserves to be quashed.

5. Per contra, learned HCGP submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

6. In relation to offences punishable in respect of 'Game of Chance' and 'Game of Skill', this Court held as under:

(i) Sri Manjunath E's case supra:

"The petitioners have called in question the proceedings pending before the MMTC, Bengaluru, in C.C.No.20386/2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 79 & 80 of the Karnataka Police Act. 2. A strong legal point raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, the entire proceedings is hit by Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C., as the Respondent- Police have not taken any permission from the Magistrate to investigate the matter and to file a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. before the Court. He contended that, even the entire charge sheet is translated into evidence, there is no material to show that the Game played by the accused ie., ‘Fantastic Three Dice Bowling’ is a game of chance or it is a game of skill, that fa