SAMEER vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11400
CRL.P No. 201304 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030091762026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
TH
DATED THIS THE 15 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 201304 OF 2026
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
SAMEER
S/O HUSSAINSAB,
AGE : 26 YEARS,
OCC : LABOURER,
R/O: KAKANAGAR HUTTI TOWN,
TQ : LINGASUGUR,
DIST : RAICHUR – 584 115.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI SANTOSH KUMAR B.BIRADAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH HUTTI POLICE STATION,
LINGASUGUR,
REP. BY ADDL. SPL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH.
2. PRAKASH MALI
AGE ABOUT 43 YEARS,
OCC : POLICE OFFICER,
R/O: HUTTI POLICE STATION,
TQ : LINGASUGUR,
DIST : RAICHUR.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI MAQBOOL AHMED, HCGP)
Digitally signed by
SUMITRA
SHERIGAR
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11400
CRL.P No. 201304 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030091762026
THIS CRL.P. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS
(NEW), UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C.(OLD), PRAYING TO,
QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C NO.77/2026 ON
THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT
LINGASUGUR ARISING OUT CRIME NO.64/2022 OF HUTTI P.S
FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 78(6) OF
THE KARNATAKA POLICE ACT, 1963 AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
ORAL ORDER
Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader
(for short ‘HCGP’) for the respondent on the petition.
Perused the relevant materials on record.
2. This petition is filed by the petitioner/
accused under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) praying to
quash the entire proceedings in CC No.77/2026 of the
learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Lingasugur,
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11400
CRL.P No. 201304 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030091762026
District Raichur arising out of Crime No.64/2022 of the
respondent Police for the offence punishable under
Section 78(6) of the Karnataka Police Act (for short ‘KP
Act’).
3. The learned HCGP has orally objected to the
petition submitting that there is prima facie case against
the petitioner for the alleged offence. The investigation is
already over and the charge sheet is filed. Therefore, at
this stage, no ground is made out by the petitioner to
quash the proceedings of the case. Hence, the learned
HCGP has sought for dismissal of the petition.
4. The prosecution was set into motion on the
complaint of the respondent Police. The case is
registered against the petitioners on the allegation that
on 08.04.2022 at about 06.30 p.m., the respondent
No.2 received credible information that an unidentified
individual was enticing the general public and accepting
money for illegal IPL cricket betting near Daruwala
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11400
CRL.P No. 201304 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030091762026
stadium, Hutti camp. Thereafter on the same day at
about 07.00 p.m., the respondent No.2 along with his
staff and two panchas raided the spot at about 07.15
p.m. and found that the petitioner was enticing the
gathered public by announcing betting odds, stating
that if Punjab Kings won he would pay Rs.1,600/- for
every Rs.1,000/- placed and if Gujarat Titans won he
would pay Rs.1,400/- for every Rs.1,000/- placed. The
police team intercepted the petitioner and conducted
raid and search in the presence of panchas and seized
cash amounting to Rs.5,300/-, one Samsung mobile
phone valued at Rs.1,000/- and certain handwritten IPL
cricket betting slips/chits and thereafter the respondent
police registered the case against the petitioner. Hence,
the petitioner/ accused is alleged to have committed the
offence.
5. After completion of the investigation, the
respondent Police filed the charge sheet against the
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11400
CRL.P No. 201304 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030091762026
petitioner and the case is registered against him in
CC No.77/2026 by the learned Magistrate.
6. Now the petitioner has come up with the
present petition seeking to quash the entire proceedings
of case against him pending before the learned
Magistrate on the ground that the offence alleged
against the petitioner is non-cognizable offence. There is
absolutely no material forthcoming from the respondent
Police to show that the Police obtained prior permission
of the learned Magistrate to register the case or at least
to file the charge sheet in the case. Therefore, without
there being prior permission, the order of taking
cognizance against the petitioner is not sustainable.
7. As mentioned hereinabove, there is no
material forthcoming from the respondent Police to
show that they obtained any prior permission of the
learned Magistrate in compliance of Section 174 (1) and
(2) of BNSS, 2023. Section 174 (2) of BNSS reads thus:
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11400
CRL.P No. 201304 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030091762026
“174. Information as to non-cognizable cases
and investigation of such cases. —(1) xxxx.
(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.”
8. In the case on hand, there is absolutely no
material forthcoming from the respondent Police to
show that they filed any application or requisition before
the learned Magistrate seeking prior permission to
register FIR and take up the investigation as provided
under Section 174(2) of BNSS. Further, there is
absolutely material on record produced by the
respondent Police to show that they obtained any order
of the learned Magistrate permitting the Investigating
Officer to register the case and take up the investigation
in the matter.
9. As submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner, the registration of the case against the
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11400
CRL.P No. 201304 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030091762026
petitioner and thereafter taking up investigation is
abuse of process of law. Without compliance of Section
174(2) of BNSS, the respondent police should not have
registered the case against the petitioner. Therefore,
without expressing any opinion regarding the merits of
the case, it is made clear that the present case against
the petitioner before the trial Court does not survive for
consideration.
10. As submitted by the learned counsel for
petitioner, the continuation of such proceedings of case
against the petitioner/ accused is sheer abuse of
process of law and same is liable to be set aside under
Section 528 of BNSS. Therefore, the petitioner has made
out sufficient grounds to quash the entire proceedings
of the case registered by the respondent police against
him. Consequently, the petition deserves to be allowed.
11. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11400
CRL.P No. 201304 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030091762026
ORDER
(a) The Criminal Petition is hereby allowed.
(b) The entire proceedings in CC No.77/2026
on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge
and JMFC, Lingasugur, District Raichur
arising out of Crime No.64/2022 of the
respondent Police for the offence
punishable under Section 78(6) of the
Karnataka Police Act registered against
the petitioner is quashed.
(c) The seized movables/ articles by the
respondent Police in the case shall be
confiscated to the State, in accordance
with law.
In view of disposal of the main petition, interim
application, if any, does not survive for consideration
and accordingly, stands disposed of.
Sd/-
(TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY)
JUDGE
MBB
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29