Usman Raja vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Usman Raja vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application partly allowed; the summoning/cognizance order dated 11.08.2022 treating the chargesheet as a State case is set aside, with liberty left to the learned court concerned to proceed with the case as a complaint case, if required, in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether a chargesheet submitted by the Investigating Officer in a case involving offences under Sections 153-A, 505(2) IPC and Section 125 of the Representation of People Act, stated to be non-cognizable, can proceed as a police report/State case, or must, in view of the Explanation to Section 2(d) Cr.P.C., be treated and decided as a complaint case. +1 more

Court's answer

In view of the Explanation to Section 2(d) Cr.P.C., the chargesheet submitted by the concerned Investigating Officer in the present case under Sections 153-A, 505(2) I.P.C. and Section 125 of Representation of People Act shall be treated as a complaint and is to be decided as a complaint.

Ratio / Principle

The learned Magistrate fell in legal error by taking cognizance as a State case, and the orders passed by him are therefore liable to be set aside.

Key takeaways

The order dated 11.08.2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bhognipur, District Kanpur Dehat, summoning the applicant on the basis of the chargesheet while treating the matter as a State case, is set aside.ratio¶20
The setting aside of the order does not preclude the learned court concerned from proceeding with the case as a complaint case, if required, in accordance with law.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal procedure - Non-cognizable offence - Police report deemed complaint - Explanation to S. 2(d) Cr.P.C. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Saurabh Srivastava, J.), Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 26527 of 2025 (Usman Raja v. State of U.P. and Another), decided October 6, 2025. The applicant sought quashing of chargesheet no. 31 of 2021 dated 15.05.2021 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 11.08.2022 in case no. 954 of 2022 (State Vs. Usman Raja) arising out of case crime no. 21 of 2021, under Sections 153-A, 505(2) of IPC and Section 125 of Representation of People Act, P.S. Satti, District Ramabai Nagar (now Kanpur Dehat), pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Bhognipur. Applicant's counsel argued that these offences are non-cognizable and that, per the Explanation to Section 2(d) Cr.P.C., the police chargesheet cannot proceed as a police case and must be dealt with as a complaint case, relying on Murli (2008 (61) ACC 54), Virendra Singh (2002 (45) ACC 609) and Shakila Bano (2008 (61) ACC 636); the AGA opposed but did not dispute the submission. Holding: per the Explanation to Section 2(d) Cr.P.C., the chargesheet submitted by the Investigating Officer shall be treated as a complaint and decided as a complaint; the Magistrate fell in legal error by taking cognizance as a State case; the summoning order dated 11.08.2022 was set aside and the application partly allowed, without precluding the court from proceeding with the case as a complaint case in accordance with law. The three ACC precedents were cited by counsel and were not independently engaged with by the Court, whose decision rests on the statutory Explanation reproduced at paras 13-18.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 26527 of 2025

Usman Raja

.....Applicant(s)

Versus State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arun Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 77

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A. G. A. and perused the record.

By means of the present application, the prayer sought by the applicant is to quash the chargesheet no. 31 of 2021 dated 15.05.2021 and cognizance/summoning order dated 11.08.2022 as well as the entire proceeding of case no.954 of 2022 (State Vs. Usman Raja) arising out of case crime no.21 of 2021, under Sections 153-A, 505(2) of IPC and Section 125 of Representation of People Act, Police Station Satti, District Ramabai Nagar (now Kanpur Dehat) pending before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Bhognipur, District Kanpur Dehat.

Learned counsel for applicant has made only one submission before the Court that offences under Sections 153-A, 505(2) I.P.C. and Section 125 of Representation of People Act are non-cognizable and in view of the explanation to Section 2(d) Cr.P.C., 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 applicant has placed reliance upon the judgments passed in the case of Murli and others Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2008 (61) ACC 54, Virendra Singh and others Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2002 (45) ACC 609 and Shakila Bano and others Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2008 (61) ACC 636 .

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

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

NA528 No. 26527 of 2025

2

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 complaint."

In view of the above explanation, charge sheet submitted by the concerned Investigating Officer in the present case under Sections 153-A, 505(2) I.P.C. and Section 125 of Representation of People Act 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.

In view thereof, order dated 11.08.2022 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Bhognipur, District Kanpur Dehat summoning the applicant on the basis of chargesheet submitted by concerned Investigating Officer under Sections 153-A, 505(2) I.P.C. and Section 125 of Representation of People Act treating the same as State case, is set aside.

Accordingly, the instant application is partly allowed .

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.

(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)

October 6, 2025

Rakesh

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