The Karnataka High Court on Thursday stayed a Magistrate's order to lodge a first information report (FIR) against Karnataka Home Minister G Parameshwara and Deputy Commissioner Shubha Kalyan for allegedly indulging in a ₹500 bet during a kabaddi competition held in Tumakuru last year.

Justice Sunil Dutt Yadav noted a lack of mens rea in the Minister's conduct,

"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 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 21.2.2026 till the next date, list the matter after the summer vacations."

Justice Sunil Dutt Yadav stayed the order passed by 42nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate KN Shivakumar on April 21.

As per reports, Parameshwara and Kalyan had entered a bet of ₹500 against the Dakshina Kannada District Team in a kabbadi competition held in Tumakuru. As the Dakshina Kannada District Team won the competition, the Minister G Parameshwara narrated in a public statement to the media about him losing the bet.

The Magistrate had relied on vernacular newspaper reports to state that there appeared to be a prima facie case against the minister.

"Further, on perusal of the endorsement given by the PSI, Kodigehalli Police Station, it appears that said police have neither considered the reports of Newspapers nor appears to have summoned any documents / evidences from the complainant before giving such an endorsement as to the complaint is baseless and lack of evidence," the Magistrate court said while directing that an FIR be lodged.

The Magistrate court also clarified that prior sanction of the concerned authority or the government is not required as the alleged offences were not part of the official duties of Parameshwara and Kalyan.

The same was challenged by the Minister before the High Court.

Senior Advocate KN Phanindra appearing for the Minister contended that after the police rejected the complaint, and the complainant approached the Magistrate with a private complaint, the Magistrate was required to call for a police report and a submission by the police officer before directing the registration of an FIR.

Advocates Samrudh Suraj Hegde, Shathabish Shivanna, Abhishek J and Karthik N appeared for the Home Minister, G Parameshwara.

Counsel for the State and complainant, S Umapathi, submitted that under Section 175(4), a police report would only be needed in a private complaint against a public servant who was discharging his duty. Since betting was not an official duty, this complaint would not require a police report.