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

The prosecution alleged that, on 8 April 2022, police raided a location near Shirur Park, Hubballi, following information that people were gambling and collecting money.

The raid resulted in the seizure of ₹1,300, OC matka chits and a ball pen.

The petitioner sought to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 7411/2025, arising from Vidyanagar Police Station Crime No. 48/2025, for an alleged offence under Section 78(3) of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963.

He argued that the offence was non-cognizable and that the mandatory procedure under Sections 155(1) and 155(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) had not been followed.

The State opposed the petition, asserting that the investigation complied with the required procedure.

1. Whether the police could investigate the alleged non-cognizable offence without a valid order of the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 155(2) Cr.P.C.

2. Whether the Magistrate’s endorsement “Permitted” on the police requisition constituted a valid order authorising investigation.

3. Whether the proceedings against the petitioner were liable to be quashed.

Sections 155(1) and 155(2) Cr.P.C. require the officer in charge, upon receiving information concerning a non-cognizable offence, to record its substance and refer the informant to the Magistrate; a police officer may not 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 Karnataka High Court held that the Magistrate must apply judicial mind to the requisition, record a reasoned finding that investigation is warranted, and specify the rank and designation of the investigating officer; a bare endorsement such as “Permitted” on the requisition is not a valid order under Section 155(2) Cr.P.C.

The Court accepted that the alleged offence under Section 78(3) of the Karnataka Police Act was non-cognizable and therefore required compliance with Sections 155(1) and 155(2) Cr.P.C.

The Magistrate had made only the endorsement “Permitted” on the police requisition.

Applying Vaggeppa, the Court found that this did not demonstrate judicial application of mind or constitute a valid order authorising investigation.

The Court also noted that no incriminating articles had been recovered from the petitioner.

In these circumstances, the police lacked authority to investigate and file the final report.