ORDER : Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional SPP appearing for the respondent. 2. Charge sheet is laid against the petitioner alleging commission of an offence punishable under Section 171-E of IPC. 3. The legal point urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the alleged offence is a non-cognizable offence and the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the said offence without ensuring compliance of Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even though an application was submitted before the learned Magistrate seeking authorization for investigation into the alleged offence, the learned Magistrate has merely endorsed as ‘permitted’. The said endorsement is not in compliance of requirements under Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. as held by this Court in the case of Praveen Basavanneppa Shivalli Vs. State of Karnataka and others reported in 2017 (1) AKR 461. 4. The learned Additional SPP appearing for the respondent has argued in support of the impugned action. 5. It is not in dispute that the offence alleged against the petitioner is a non-cognizable offence. Under the said circumstance the respondent Police could not have investigated into the alleged offence without prior permission of the learned Magistrate as required under Section 155(2) of the Cr.P.C. The records disclose that an application was submitted before the learned Magistrate seeking permission to register case and to investigate into the alleged offence. But, the learned Magistrate has not passed any order on the said application instead has made an endorsement reading as ‘permitted’. This Court has already considered the effect of such an endorsement and has held that the endorsement made by the learned Magistrate on the application submitted by the Police Officer under Section 155 Cr.P.C. as ‘permitted’ is not an `order’ in the eye of law. Therefore, in the light of these facts the impugned proceedings initiated against the petitioner being illegal and opposed to mandatory requirement of Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. are liable to be quashed. 6. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Proceedings initiated against the petitioner and presently pending on the file of JMFC (II Court), Mysore in C.C. No. 327/2014 are hereby quashed.