Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 301 (KAR)

Raghu s/o Krishna Kulakarni v. state of Karnataka

2017-02-03

K.N.PHANEENDRA

body2017
ORDER : This petition is filed seeking quashing of the entire proceedings in C.C. No. 3690/2014 on the file of Prl. Civil Judge & JMFC, Athani, registered under Section 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act (for short ‘Act’) against the petitioners. 2. The brief factual matrix of the case are that the Station House Officer of Athani Police Station has registered a case against the petitioners and others on the complaint lodged by M.V. Baramani, Police Inspector, D.C.R.B., Belgaum, wherein the said Police Inspector has stated in the FIR that on 13.01.2014 at 13.30 hours he received a credible information that near Masoba Temple at Yalamalle of Chamakeri village, in the land of one Vileenaraj son of Manohar Yalamalle, some people are playing cards in the name and style “Andar Bahar” by means of betting with the money. On receiving such information, along with his staff he raided the said place and found that the petitioners and other accused persons were found playing “Andar Bahar” game with the playing cards. In fact, he seized certain articles from the spot and thereafter lodged the complaint to the Athani Police and in turn the Athani Police have registered a case in Crime No. 36/2014 for the offences punishable u/S 79 and 80 of the Act and proceeded to investigate the matter and after investigation submitted a charge sheet before the jurisdictional Court. 3. The short point and legal point raised by the learned counsel is that under Section 79 and 80 of the Act, are non-cognizable offences and the Police have no jurisdiction to register a case in crime and investigate the matter and file charge sheet without prior permission of the jurisdictional Magistrate u/S 155(2) of Cr.P.C. 4. It is also stated by the learned counsel that earlier some of the accused persons have approached this Court in Crl. P. No. 100481/2016, wherein this Court has quashed the entire proceedings in respect of accused No.10, 11 and 27. This Court had an occasion to deal with in detail with regard to the procedure that should be followed by the Police in a non-cognizable offence in 2014 (4) KCCR 3355 [Moin Basha Kurnooli V. The State of Karnataka by Cowl Bazaar Police Station, Bellary], wherein this Court has categorically held that the investigation of a non-cognizable offence without permission from the competent Magistrate is vitiated by incurable illegalities and defects. It is also worth to note the decision of the Apex Court reported in AIR 1992 SC 604 [State of Haryana and Others V. Bhajan Lal and Others], wherein the Apex Court has observed that, where allegations in the FIR and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR, do not disclose a cognizable offence justifying the investigation by the Police Officer under Section 156(1) of Cr.P.C. except under the order of the Magistrate within the purview of Sec. 155(2) of Cr.P.C. In such an eventuality, such investigation and the cognizance taken by illegal investigation are liable to be quashed. In view of the above said facts and circumstances of the case, as this Court has already quashed the proceedings in respect of accused No. 10, 11 and 27, this petition also deserves to be allowed on the ground of parity also. Hence, the following order is passed. ORDER Petition is allowed. Consequently, the entire proceedings in C.C. No. 3690/2014 on the file of Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Athani, is hereby quashed. In view of the disposal of the petition on merits, I.A. No. 1/2017 filed for stay does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, it is also dismissed.