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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application partly allowed: the cognizance/summoning order dated 30.08.2024 passed by the learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi against the applicants on the basis of the Investigating Officer's charge-sheet, treating the case as a State case, is set aside; however, the order does not preclude the learned court concerned from proceeding with the case treating it as a complaint case, if required.

Issue for consideration

Whether a police charge-sheet disclosing only non-cognizable offences (Sections 323, 504 IPC) must be treated as a complaint under the Explanation to Section 2(d) Cr.P.C., so that cognizance/summoning taken treating it as a State case constitutes legal error warranting set-aside.

Court's answer

In view of the Explanation to Section 2(d) Cr.P.C., the charge-sheet submitted by the concerned Investigating Officer in this case under Sections 323, 504 IPC shall be treated as a complaint and decided as a complaint; the learned Magistrate fell into legal error by taking cognizance as a State case, and the orders passed by him are therefore liable to be set aside.

Ratio / Principle

The cognizance/summoning order dated 30.08.2024 passed by the learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi against the applicants on the basis of the charge-sheet submitted by the concerned Investigating Officer under Sections 323, 504 IPC, treating the same as a State case, is set aside.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Law — Non-cognizable offence — Explanation to Section 2(d) Cr.P.C. — Where investigation discloses commission of only non-cognizable offences (Sections 323, 504 IPC), the charge-sheet submitted by the police officer is deemed a complaint and the officer deemed the complainant; a Magistrate errs by taking cognizance treating it as a State case. Held: cognizance/summoning order dated 30.08.2024 passed by Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi on the basis of the charge-sheet under Sections 323, 504 IPC set aside; application under Section 528 BNSS partly allowed; liberty left to proceed with the case as a complaint case. Precedents relied on: Murli (2008 (61) ACC 54); Virendra Singh (2002 (45) ACC 609); Shakila Bano (2008 (61) ACC 636). (Saurabh Srivastava, J.)

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 32761 of 2025

Aman Kumar And Another

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Ashish Kumar Chaurasiya
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 77

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

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

The present application has been preferred for seeking quashing of charge-sheet dated 12.06.2024 and cognizance/summoning order dated 30.08.2024 along with entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.74988 of 2024 (State Vs. Aman Kumar and Another) arising out of Case Crime No.150 of 2024, under Section 323, 504 IPC, P.S. Rohaniya, DistrictVaranasi, pending in the court of learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi.

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 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 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 applicants.

Before proceeding further, the relevant provisions of Section 2 (d) of

NA528 No. 32761 of 2025

2

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."

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.

In view thereof, cognizance/summoning order dated 30.08.2024 passed by learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi against the applicants on the basis of charge-sheet submitted by concerned Investigating Officer under Sections 323, 504 I.P.C. 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.

October 14, 2025 Saif

(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)

Digitally signed by :- SHAIKH SAIF ABDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad