Court Rules Investigating Officer Can Seek Magistrate's Permission Directly for Investigating Non-Cognizable Offences, Rejecting Petitioners' Challenge to Procedure
Bengaluru, October 13, 2026 - The Karnataka High Court in Criminal Petition No. 9738 of 2021 delivered a significant judgment clarifying procedural aspects regarding investigation of non-cognizable offences under Sections 155(1) and 155(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.). The Court held that the Investigating Officer (IO) or the Station House Officer (SHO) may directly seek permission from the Magistrate to investigate non-cognizable offences and that failure to refer the informant to the Magistrate does not invalidate the investigation or warrant quashing of proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C., absent substantial injustice.
The petitioners, accused in a criminal case involving alleged conspiracy and intimidation charges under Sections 120B, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, challenged the legality of the investigation on the ground that the police failed to comply with Section 155(1) Cr.P.C., which mandates that the police must refer the informant to the Magistrate when the offence is non-cognizable. Instead, the police themselves sought permission from the Magistrate under Section 155(2) to investigate the matter. The petitioners argued that this procedural irregularity should lead to quashing of the proceedings.
The High Court examined the statutory provisions and the facts of the case, including the fact that the police had registered a Non-Cognizable Report (NCR) before seeking permission from the Magistrate, who subsequently granted the permission to investigate. The Court relied on prior Karnataka High Court judgments, including Prakash Raj @ Prakash Rai v. State of Karnataka, and the Supreme Court's ruling in State of Gujarat v. Girish Radhakrishnan Varde, to hold that Section 155(2) of the Cr.P.C. is silent on who must seek permission, and that it can be either the informant or the police officer.
The Court further observed that the procedural lapse of not referring the informant to the Magistrate under Section 155(1) is, at best, a procedural irregularity. Since the police obtained valid permission to proceed with the investigation, the irregularity did not cause substantial injustice to the petitioners and was therefore not a valid ground for quashing the proceedings. The Court dismissed the petition.
In addition, the Court took note of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which contains provisions analogous to Section 155 Cr.P.C., specifically Section 174 BNSS. The Court highlighted the absence of rules framed by the State of Karnataka under BNSS and directed the Registry to forward a copy of its order to the Law Commission of Karnataka for framing necessary rules, citing that other States such as Telangana, Jammu & Kashmir, Gujarat, Delhi, and Puducherry have already enacted rules under this provision.
This judgment provides clarity on the procedural framework for investigating non-cognizable offences, affirming that the police can initiate investigation upon obtaining Magistrate's permission without strictly referring the informant, thereby preventing misuse of procedural technicalities to derail criminal investigations.
Bottom Line:
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 155(1) and 155(2) - Non-cognizable offence - For obtaining permission to investigate, it is not necessary that only the informant must approach the Magistrate - Permission under Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. may be sought either by the informant or by the Station House Officer/Investigating Officer - Non-compliance of Section 155(1) by not referring informant to Magistrate, when police themselves obtained permission under Section 155(2), is at best a procedural irregularity and not a ground to quash proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. absent substantial injustice - Court also reiterated need for framing rules under Section 174 BNSS.
Statutory provision(s):
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Sections 155(1), 155(2), 482; Indian Penal Code Sections 120B, 506, 34; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 174
Susheel Mondal v. State of Karnataka, (Karnataka) : Law Finder Doc Id # 3004107
