An investigation into a non-cognizable offence is vitiated if initiated without a formal, reasoned order from a Magistrate, as a mere 'permitted' endorsement lacks the necessary application of judicial mind required under Section 155(2) of the Cr.P.C.

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482(FILED U/S.528 BNSS) CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE COGNIZANCE ORDER DATED 29.11.2025 IN C.C.NO.46782/2025 ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.182/2025 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 THAT IS KALASIPALYA P.S., AT ANNEXURE- D FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S 351(2),352 OF BNS NOW PENDING ON THE FILES OF THE HONBLE V ACMM, BENGLAURU WHEREIN PETITIONER ARRAYED AS ACCUSED NO.1 HEREIN RESPECTIVELY., AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner is before the Court calling in question the proceedings in C.C.No.46782/2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 351(2) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 ('the BNS' for short), all for non cognizable offences.

2. Heard Sri. Saddam R., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Channappa Earappa, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

3. A crime comes to be registered against the petitioner pursuant to the permission so granted by the learned Magistrate on 05.09.2025, the order granting permission as obtaining under Section 155 (2) of the Cr.P.C. reads as follows:

"Kalasipalya PS filed requisition for seeking permission to register the case in NCR No.114/2025 at 1.00pm. Kalsipalya Police is h is hereby directed to register the case in NCR No.114/2025 and conduct the investigation.

Intimidation issued accordingly.”

4. The permissions granted of this kind have been held to be illegal and have been set at naught by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in plethora of cases.

5. The issue in the lis stands answered by the judgment of Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Vaggeppa Gurulinga Jangaligi. (Jangaligi) vs. The State of Karnataka reported in ILR 2020 KAR 630.

6. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the aforesaid case, has held as follows:

“3. The petitioner has stated that the complaint is misconceived, and the alleged offence is non-cognizable as per the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Therefore, the Police have no authority to investigate the crime. It is further submitted that the Police have not complied with mandatory requirement of Section 155 of Cr. P.C. When the officer-in-charge of the Police Station received information regarding commission of non-cognizable offence, he shall enter the same in a book to be maintained by the said officer and refer the informant to he Magistrate. Further, sub-Section (2) of Section 155 of Cr. P.C., mandates that no Police Officer shall investigate a non-cognizable case without order of a Magistrate having power to try such case or commit such case for trial. The petitioner has further stated that there is no iota of evidence that the above said mandatory requirement are complied with. There is no speaking order by the jurisdictional Magistrate permitting the Police to take up investigation. Therefore, the proceedings initiated against the petitioner who is arrayed as accused No. 4 in the charge sheet are liable to be quashed.

5. The Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the offence punishable under Section 87 of the K.P. Act is non-cognizable one and therefore, as per Section 155 (1) of Cr. P.C., the informant PSI ought to have been referred to the jurisdictional Magistrate and the jurisdictional Magistrate ought to have passed the order, permitting the concerned Police to take up investigation of the case and thes