BABULLE @ RAJPAL GAURversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                 APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 39450 of 2026

Babulle @ Rajpal Gaur
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                    Versus

State of U.P. and Another
                                                                .....Opposite
                                                                      Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)           : Amit Kumar, Yogesh Kumar Vaish
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 13.08.2017 and cognizance/summoning order dated
16.12.2017 along with entire proceedings of Case No.3248 of 2017 (State
Vs. Niranjan Gaur and another), arising out of N.C.R. No.34 of 2017,
under Section 323, 504 IPC, P.S. Walter Ganj, District Basti, pending in
the court of learned Gram Nyayalaya, Bhanpur, District Basti.

3. Learned counsel for applicants has made only one submission before
the Court that offences under Sections 323 and 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.
                                                                                              NA528 No. 39450 of 2026
                                                                        2


                                    6. Before proceeding further, the relevant provisions of Section 2 (d) of
                                    Cr.P.C. are being reproduced for ready reference as under:-

                                               "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
                                    and 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 16.12.2017 passed in Case No.3248 of
                                    2017 (State Vs. Niranjan Gaur and another), arising out of N.C.R. No.34
                                    of 2017, summoning the applicants on the basis of chargesheet submitted
                                    by concerned Investigating Officer under Sections 323 and 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 17, 2026
                                    Ashish/-

                                                                                           (Saurabh Srivastava,J.)




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