Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Asif and Maiboob alias Panshop Maiboob Pasha, filed a criminal petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) before the High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench, seeking to quash the order dated 27-08-2024 passed by the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Lingasugur, in C.C. No. 1017/2024. The order took cognizance and issued process against the petitioners for an offence punishable under Section 78(III) of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963, arising from Hutti Police Station Crime No. 147/2024. The petitioners were represented by Sri Shivanand V. Pattanashetti, and the respondent-State was represented by Smt. Arati Patil, HCGP. The court heard both sides and examined the record. The petitioners argued that the offence under Section 78(III) of the Karnataka Police Act is non-cognizable and bailable, and that the police officer who filed the charge sheet was not a complainant but an investigating officer, thus requiring sanction under Section 155(2) of the CrPC before cognizance could be taken. The court rejected this argument, holding that the police officer who files the charge sheet in a non-cognizable case is deemed to be the complainant, and therefore no sanction under Section 155(2) CrPC is necessary. The court found no illegality or irregularity in the order of cognizance and process, and dismissed the petition as devoid of merits.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Quashing of Cognizance Order - Section 528 BNSS, 2023 - Offence under Section 78(III) Karnataka Police Act, 1963 - The petitioners sought quashing of the order dated 27-08-2024 passed by the Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Lingasugur, taking cognizance and issuing process for offence under Section 78(III) of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963. The court held that the offence is non-cognizable and bailable, and since the police officer filed the charge sheet as a complainant, no sanction under Section 155(2) CrPC was required. The petition was dismissed as devoid of merits. (Paras 1-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order of taking cognizance and issue of process for an offence under Section 78(III) of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963 is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed as devoid of merits.
Law Points
- Section 528 BNSS
- 2023
- Section 78(III) Karnataka Police Act
- 1963
- cognizance
- process
- non-cognizable offence
- bailable offence
- sanction
- Section 155(2) CrPC
- police officer as complainant
Case Details
2025 LawText (KAR) (07) 98
Shivanand V. Pattanashetti, Arati Patil
Asif S/o Abdul Raheman and Maiboob alias Panshop Maiboob Pasha S/o Abdul Shukur
The State of Karnataka through Hutti Police Station
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 to quash order of taking cognizance and issue of process.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought quashing of order dated 27-08-2024 in C.C. No. 1017/2024 taking cognizance and issuing process for offence under Section 78(III) of Karnataka Police Act, 1963.
Filing Reason
Petitioners contended that the offence under Section 78(III) of Karnataka Police Act is non-cognizable and bailable, and the police officer who filed charge sheet was not a complainant, thus sanction under Section 155(2) CrPC was required before cognizance.
Previous Decisions
Order dated 27-08-2024 passed by Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Lingasugur, taking cognizance and issuing process in C.C. No. 1017/2024.
Issues
Whether the order of taking cognizance and issue of process for offence under Section 78(III) of Karnataka Police Act, 1963 is sustainable in law.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the offence is non-cognizable and bailable, and the police officer who filed charge sheet was not a complainant but an investigating officer, requiring sanction under Section 155(2) CrPC.
Respondent-State argued that the police officer who files charge sheet in a non-cognizable case is deemed to be the complainant, and no sanction under Section 155(2) CrPC is required.
Ratio Decidendi
For an offence under Section 78(III) of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963, which is non-cognizable and bailable, the police officer who files the charge sheet is deemed to be the complainant, and therefore no sanction under Section 155(2) of the CrPC is required before taking cognizance. The order of cognizance and issue of process is sustainable in law.
Judgment Excerpts
Heard Sri Shivanand V. Pattanashetti, learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt. Arati Patil, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State.
Petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS, 2023), with the following prayer: ...
The offence under Section 78(III) of the Karnataka Police Act is non-cognizable and bailable.
The police officer who files the charge sheet in a non-cognizable case is deemed to be the complainant and therefore no sanction under Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. is required.
There is no illegality or irregularity in the order of taking cognizance and issue of process.
Accordingly, petition is dismissed as devoid of merits.
Procedural History
The petitioners filed a criminal petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 before the High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench, challenging the order dated 27-08-2024 passed by the Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Lingasugur, in C.C. No. 1017/2024, which took cognizance and issued process for an offence under Section 78(III) of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963, arising from Hutti Police Station Crime No. 147/2024. The court heard both sides and dismissed the petition.
Acts & Sections
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: 528
- Karnataka Police Act, 1963: 78(III)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 155(2)
