SUDHIR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

           APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 39707 of 2026

Sudhir And Another
                                                             .....Applicant(s)
                                   Versus
State of U.P. and Another
                                                                .....Opposite
                                                                      Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)             :   Ramesh Pundir, Rekha Pundir
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
summoning/cognizance order dated 23.07.2026 along with entire
proceedings of Criminal Case No.1464 of 2026 (State Vs. Sudhir and
others), arising out of Case Crime No.459 of 2025, under Section 115(2),
351(3), 352 of BNS, P.S. Deoband, District Saharanpur, pending in the court
of learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Deoband, Saharanpur.

3. Learned counsel for applicants has made only one submission before the
Court that offences under Section 115(2), 351(3), 352 of BNS are non-
cognizable and in view of the explanation to Section 2(1)(h) of BNSS, the
charge sheet 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. Since the argument as advanced on behalf of learned counsel for
applicants, is based on legal issue, no notice is required to be issued to
opposite party no.2.

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

6. Before proceeding further, the relevant provisions of Section 2(1)(h) of
BNSS are being reproduced for ready reference as under:-

     "2. Definitions.-(1) In this Sanhita, unless the context otherwise
                                                                                              NA528 No. 39707 of 2026
                                                                     2

                                         requires,-

                                         (h) "complaint" means any allegation made orally or in writing
                                         to a Magistrate, with a view to his taking action under this
                                         Sanhita, 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 Section 115(2), 351(3), 352
                                    of BNS, should have been treated as complaint and it is to be decided as
                                    complaint but 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 23.07.2026 passed in Criminal Case No.1464
                                    of 2026 (State Vs. Sudhir and others), arising out of Case Crime No.459 of
                                    2025, summoning the applicants on the basis of chargesheet submitted by
                                    concerned Investigating Officer under Section 115(2), 351(3), 352 of BNS
                                    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 18, 2026
                                    Vivek Kr.
                                                                                          (Saurabh Srivastava,J.)




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