OMPRAKASH YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

           APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34982 of 2026

Omprakash Yadav
                                                             .....Applicant(s)
                                   Versus
State of U.P. and Another
                                                                .....Opposite
                                                                      Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Arpit Malviya,          Awadhesh      Kumar
                                Malviya
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 79
                 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State.

2. The present application has been preferred for seeking quashing of
chargesheet dated 20.03.2023 and cognizance/summoning order dated
05.06.2023 along with entire proceedings of Case No.41149 of 2023 (State
Vs. Jaiprakash Yadav and others), arising out of N.C.R. No.41 of 2020,
under Sections 323, 504 IPC, P.S. Suhwal, District Ghazipur, pending in the
court of learned Judicial Officer Gram Nyalay Jamaniya, District Ghazipur.

3. Learned counsel for applicants has made only one submission before the
Court that offences under Sections 323, 504 I.P.C. are non-cognizable and in
view of the explanation to Section 2(d) Cr.P.C., the chargesheet filed by the
Investigating Officer concerned cannot proceed as a police case and the
same is liable to be proceeded with as a complaint case. In support of his
submission, learned counsel of applicants has placed reliance upon the
judgment passed in the case of Shakila Bano and others Vs. State of U.P.
and another, 2008 (61) ACC 636.

4. Although, learned AGA opposed the prayer sought through the instant
application but did not dispute the submissions so made by learned counsel
for applicants.

5. Since the arguments as advanced on behalf of learned counsel for
applicants, are based on legal issue, no notice is required to be issued to
opposite party no.2.

6. Before proceeding further, the relevant provisions of Section 2 (d) of
Cr.P.C. are being reproduced for ready reference as under:-
                                                                                            NA528 No. 34982 of 2026
                                                                    2

                                         "2. Definitions.-In this Code, unless the context otherwise
                                         requires,-

                                         (d) "complaint" means any allegation made orally or in writing
                                         to a Magistrate, with a view to his taking action under this Code,
                                         that some person, whether known or unknown, has committed an
                                         offence, but does not include a police report.

                                         Explanation.- A report made by a police officer in a case which
                                         discloses, after investigation, the commission of a non-
                                         cognizable offence shall be deemed to be a complaint; and the
                                         police officer by whom such report is made shall be deemed to be
                                         the complainant."

                                    7. In view of the above explanation, charge sheet submitted by the concerned
                                    Investigating Officer in the present case under Sections 323, 504 I.P.C. shall
                                    be treated as complaint and it is to be decided as complaint and the learned
                                    Magistrate fell in legal error by taking cognizance as State case and the
                                    orders passed by him is, therefore, liable to be set aside.

                                    8. In view thereof, order dated 05.06.2023 passed in Case No.41149 of 2023
                                    (State Vs. Jaiprakash Yadav and others), arising out of N.C.R. No.41 of
                                    2020, summoning the applicants on the basis of chargesheet submitted by
                                    concerned Investigating Officer under Sections 323, 504 I.P.C. treating the
                                    same as State case, is set aside.

                                    9. Accordingly, the instant application is partly allowed.

                                    10. However, it is made clear that this order shall not preclude the learned
                                    court concerned to proceed with the case treating it as complaint case, if
                                    required, in accordance with law.

                                    September 9, 2026
                                    Ashish/-
                                                                                        (Saurabh Srivastava,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
ASHISH KUMAR SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad