MALATI DEVI AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
           APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 36888 of 2026

Malati Devi And 3 Others
                                                            .....Applicant(s)
                                  Versus
State of U.P. and Another
                                                                .....Opposite
                                                                      Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                   :   Rajneesh Kumar Singh
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
cognizance/summoning order dated 22.12.2022 passed by Civil Judge
(S.D.)/ A.C.J.M, Kushinagar at Padrauna, as well as entire proceedings of
Criminal Case No.15790 of 2022 (State vs. Godhan Gaud and others) arising
out of Case Crime No.23 of 2022, under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 IPC,
P.S. Captanganj, District Kushi Nagar, pending in the court of learned Civil
Judge (S.D.)/ A.C.J.M, Kushinagar at Padrauna.

3. Learned counsel for applicants has made only one submission before
the Court that offences under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 IPC 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. 36888 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 420,
                                    406, 504, 506 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 22.12.2022 passed in Criminal Case
                                    No.15790 of 2022 (State vs. Godhan Gaud and others) arising out of Case
                                    Crime No.23 of 2022, summoning the applicants on the basis of
                                    chargesheet submitted by concerned Investigating Officer under Sections
                                    420, 406, 504, 506 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 11, 2026
                                    Ashish/-
                                                                                       (Saurabh Srivastava,J.)




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