<p>Bengaluru: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/karnataka-high-court">Karnataka High Court</a> on Thursday stayed a special court’s order directing registration of FIR against Home Minister <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/g-parameshwara">G Parameshwara</a> and Shubha Kalyan, Deputy Commissioner of Tumakuru district, for allegedly indulging in a Rs 500 bet during a kabaddi competition held in Tumakuru. </p><p>Justice Sunil Dutt Yadav passed this interim order observing that there is a lack of mens rea (criminal intent) in the conduct of the Home Minister.</p><p>On April 21, a special court for cases involving elected representatives had ordered an investigation based on a private complaint filed by one HR Nagabhushan. </p><p>The statement made by Parameshwara was aired in local TV channels as saying, “I lost Rs 500. We both, the DC and I, had a bet and I lost Rs 500." The Kabaddi match reportedly was held in October 2025.</p><p>The counsel representing Parameshwara submitted that the special court was required to call for a police report before acting upon a private complaint. </p>.Supreme Court to consider Karnataka's plea against quashing of KCOCA case against BJP MLA B A Basavaraja.<p>The submission by the police officer was to be recorded before directing the registration of an FIR, the counsel said. The private complainant had approached the special court after the police refused to entertain the complaint, the counsel said.</p><p>On the other hand, the counsel representing the private complainant argued that under the BNSS, a police report would only be required in a private complaint against a public servant who was discharging his duty.</p><p>The special court had recorded a finding that a prior sanction from the respective competitive authorities is not necessary since the offences alleged against the Home Minister and the Deputy Commissioner appear to be not coming within the purview of discharge of their official functions.</p><p>Justice Sunil Dutt Yadav observed that prima facie the acts alleged lack mens rea. “It must be noticed that the context in which the alleged offence is made out prima facie is lacking in mens rea even if it is submitted that there is some act which is in the nature of the offence. In the light of the contention raised regarding non-adherence of the procedure under 175 (3) of calling upon the police for their submission which is a procedure incorporated under the BNSS, 2023 and absence of following of such procedure which is made out from perusal of the order, the case is made out to consider the interim prayer. Accordingly, there would be a stay of further proceedings and order dated April 21, 2026, till the next date,” the court said, while adjourning the matter.</p>
<p>Bengaluru: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/karnataka-high-court">Karnataka High Court</a> on Thursday stayed a special court’s order directing registration of FIR against Home Minister <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/g-parameshwara">G Parameshwara</a> and Shubha Kalyan, Deputy Commissioner of Tumakuru district, for allegedly indulging in a Rs 500 bet during a kabaddi competition held in Tumakuru. </p><p>Justice Sunil Dutt Yadav passed this interim order observing that there is a lack of mens rea (criminal intent) in the conduct of the Home Minister.</p><p>On April 21, a special court for cases involving elected representatives had ordered an investigation based on a private complaint filed by one HR Nagabhushan. </p><p>The statement made by Parameshwara was aired in local TV channels as saying, “I lost Rs 500. We both, the DC and I, had a bet and I lost Rs 500." The Kabaddi match reportedly was held in October 2025.</p><p>The counsel representing Parameshwara submitted that the special court was required to call for a police report before acting upon a private complaint. </p>.Supreme Court to consider Karnataka's plea against quashing of KCOCA case against BJP MLA B A Basavaraja.<p>The submission by the police officer was to be recorded before directing the registration of an FIR, the counsel said. The private complainant had approached the special court after the police refused to entertain the complaint, the counsel said.</p><p>On the other hand, the counsel representing the private complainant argued that under the BNSS, a police report would only be required in a private complaint against a public servant who was discharging his duty.</p><p>The special court had recorded a finding that a prior sanction from the respective competitive authorities is not necessary since the offences alleged against the Home Minister and the Deputy Commissioner appear to be not coming within the purview of discharge of their official functions.</p><p>Justice Sunil Dutt Yadav observed that prima facie the acts alleged lack mens rea. “It must be noticed that the context in which the alleged offence is made out prima facie is lacking in mens rea even if it is submitted that there is some act which is in the nature of the offence. In the light of the contention raised regarding non-adherence of the procedure under 175 (3) of calling upon the police for their submission which is a procedure incorporated under the BNSS, 2023 and absence of following of such procedure which is made out from perusal of the order, the case is made out to consider the interim prayer. Accordingly, there would be a stay of further proceedings and order dated April 21, 2026, till the next date,” the court said, while adjourning the matter.</p>