A Magistrate’s bare endorsement does not authorize investigation of a non-cognizable offence.

The petitioner, accused No. 2, sought to quash proceedings in C.C. No. 2670/2024 arising from Muragod Police Station Crime No. 75/2024, registered for an alleged offence under Section 78(3) of the Karnataka Police Act.

The prosecution alleged that accused No. 1 collected money and OC numbers while playing matka near the Hosur village bus stand and handed them to the petitioner.

After investigation, the police filed a charge sheet against both accused.

The petitioner contended that the alleged offence was non-cognizable and that the police had investigated without complying with Sections 155(1) and 155(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

The Magistrate had endorsed that the PSI was “permitted to conduct investigation”.

1. Whether the police could investigate the alleged non-cognizable offence under Section 78(3) of the Karnataka Police Act without a valid order of the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 155(2) CrPC.

2. Whether the Magistrate’s endorsement permitting investigation, made without judicial consideration of the material, satisfied the requirements of Section 155(2) CrPC.

Under Section 155(1) CrPC, when information concerning a non-cognizable offence is received, the officer in charge must enter its substance in the prescribed book and refer the informant to the Magistrate; under Section 155(2), police cannot investigate such an offence without an order from a Magistrate empowered to try or commit the case.

In Vaggeppa Gurulinga Jangaligi v. State of Karnataka, ILR 2020 KAR 630, the Court held that a Magistrate’s mere endorsement of “permitted” on a police requisition is not a valid order: the Magistrate must consider the requisition judicially, record satisfaction that investigation is warranted, and identify the police officer authorised to investigate.

The Court treated the alleged offence under Section 78(3) of the Karnataka Police Act as non-cognizable.

Because the alleged offence was non-cognizable, the police were required to follow Section 155 CrPC before commencing investigation.

The Magistrate’s endorsement that the PSI was permitted to investigate did not meet that requirement: the record indicated that permission was granted soon after the raid and seizure, without the Magistrate perusing the available material or exercising the judicial scrutiny required by Vaggeppa.

The police therefore lacked authority to investigate and file the charge sheet, making continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner unsustainable.

Pending interlocutory applications, if any, were disposed of.