Andar-Bahar Case Against One Accused Quashed: Karnataka HC Says Police Needed Magistrate’s Permission For Final Non-Cognizable KP Act Charges

In brief

The question

Whether the initial registration of a case that included a cognizable offence under Section 112 of the BNS obviated the need for the Magistrate’s permission when the charge sheet ultimately alleged only non-cognizable offences under Sections 79 and 80 of the KP Act

The court held

The Court answered the issues in the petitioner’s favour and allowed the petition.

It also directed

It quashed the proceedings in C.C. No. 14885/2025, arising from Crime No. 118/2025, for offences under Sections 79 and 80 of the KP Act, insofar as they concerned the petitioner, accused No. 8

01Facts

Police raided a lodge room after receiving information that persons were playing andar-bahar, and allegedly seized playing cards and ₹1,24,890. The petitioner was arrayed as accused No. 8. The case was initially registered under Section 112 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), and Sections 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act (KP Act); following investigation, however, the charge sheet alleged only offences under Sections 79 and 80 of the KP Act

p. 4

The petitioner sought to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 14885/2025, arguing that the police had not obtained the Magistrate’s prior permission required for non-cognizable offences

p. 2, 5

02Issues

i.Whether the initial registration of a case that included a cognizable offence under Section 112 of the BNS obviated the need for the Magistrate’s permission when the charge sheet ultimately alleged only non-cognizable offences under Sections 79 and 80 of the KP Act

pp. 5–9

ii.Whether proceedings for those non-cognizable offences could continue in the absence of prior permission under Section 174 of the BNSS

pp. 5–6, 9–10

03Law Applied

The Court applied Section 174 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, holding that prior permission of the Magistrate was required to investigate non-cognizable offences under Sections 79 and 80 of the KP Act

pp. 5–6, 9–10

It distinguished the initial inclusion of the cognizable offence under Section 112 of the BNS from the offences ultimately charged, reasoning that the charge sheet’s limitation to non-cognizable offences made the permission requirement applicable

p. 5, 9

The Court also relied on coordinate-bench orders in Crl.P. No. 201619/2023 and Crl.P. No. 6350/2022, and noted that proceedings against other accused in the same case had been quashed in Crl.P. No. 201080/2026

pp. 6–7, 9–10

Provisions in the judgment · 6 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528 Section 174

KARNATAKA POLICE ACT, 1963. Section 79 Section 80

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 112

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 155

04Reasoning

Although the case was initially registered in part for a cognizable offence, the Court focused on the final report, which alleged only offences under Sections 79 and 80 of the KP Act. As those offences were non-cognizable, the Court held that the police required the Magistrate’s prior permission under Section 174 of the BNSS.

pp. 5–10

It rejected the State’s argument that the initial cognizable charge made permission unnecessary, found the cited coordinate-bench decisions applicable, and concluded that proceeding without the required permission constituted an abuse of process

pp. 5–10

05Holding

The Court answered the issues in the petitioner’s favour and allowed the petition.

pp. 9–10

It quashed the proceedings in C.C. No. 14885/2025, arising from Crime No. 118/2025, for offences under Sections 79 and 80 of the KP Act, insofar as they concerned the petitioner, accused No. 8

pp. 9–10

LawLens.Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF