Smt. Jyoti Jaiswal Vs State of Uttar Pradesh and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Smt. Jyoti Jaiswal Vs State of Uttar Pradesh and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application finally disposed of: the cognizance order dated 22.02.2024 is set aside and the Magistrate may take cognizance afresh, if he so chooses, by proceeding as a complaint case under Chapter XV CrPC, keeping in mind Proviso (a) to Section 200 CrPC.

Issue for consideration

Whether the chargesheet dated 05.11.2023 under Sections 323/504 IPC, disclosing only a non-cognizable offence, could validly be the basis of the cognizance taken by the Magistrate on 22.02.2024, or whether such a chargesheet must be treated as a complaint under Explanation 2(d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Court's answer

The applicant's argument grounded in Explanation 2(d) CrPC is well founded: a chargesheet that discloses, after investigation, the commission of only a non-cognizable offence shall be deemed a complaint, and consequently the order taking cognizance on such a chargesheet is set aside.

Ratio / Principle

Following setting aside of the cognizance order, the Magistrate remains free to take cognizance afresh, if he so chooses, by proceeding in the matter as a complaint case under Chapter XV of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Key takeaways

While proceeding as a complaint case, the Magistrate can also keep in mind Proviso (a) to Section 200 CrPC, under which, when the complaint is made in writing, the Magistrate need not examine the complainant and the witnesses.obiter¶6

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing - Charge-sheet confined to non-cognizable offence (Sections 323/504 IPC) - Explanation 2(d) CrPC deems a police report disclosing, after investigation, the commission of a non-cognizable offence to be a complaint, with the police officer as complainant - Cognizance taken directly on such a charge-sheet set aside - Magistrate left free to take cognizance afresh, if he so chooses, by proceeding as a complaint case under Chapter XV CrPC - Proviso (a) to Section 200 CrPC (written complaint; examination of complainant not necessary) flagged for the Magistrate's consideration - Reliance on co-ordinate Bench decision in Santosh Kumar (Application U/S 482 No. 45609 of 2018, decided 31.1.2019) - Application under Section 528 BNSS disposed of (Deepak Verma, J.).

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:136862

Court No. - 72

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 375 of 2025

Applicant :- Smt. Jyoti Jaiswal Opposite Party :- State Of Uttar Pradesh And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prakhar Tandon Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

Heard Sri Prakhar Tandon, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

The present 528 BNSS application has been filed to quash the impugned chargesheet dated 05.11.2023 Under sections 323/504 I.P.C. P.S. Rail Bazar, District East (Commissionrate, Kanpur Nagar) submitted in Case Crime NCR no.62 of 2023, impugned cognizance order dated 22.02.2024 passed by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar and entire proceedings of Case No.33215 of 2024.

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that charged section is non-cognizable section and the learned Magistrate may pass an order taking cognizance, if he so desires, by proceeding under Chapter XV of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Reliance has been placed to Explanation 2(d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which reads as follows:-

"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."

Learned A.G.A. has stated that no useful purpose would be served in issuing notice to the opposite party no.2 as it will only delay the proceedings of the present case.

Therefore, on the basis of aforesaid Explanation, which has been interpreted by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Application u/s 482 No. 45609 of 2018 (Santosh Kumar and 2 others vs. State of U.P. and others) decided on 31.1.2019, wherein it has been held that when the charge-sheet is only of non-cognizable offence, in view of the aforesaid provision, the charge sheet should be treated as a complaint.

The argument of learned counsel for the applicant is well founded and the order taking cognizance is set aside. Now, the Magistrate may pass an order taking cognizance, if he so chooses, by proceeding in this matter as a complaint case under Chapter XV of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He can also keep in mind Proviso(a) to Section 200 Cr.P.C., which reads as follows:-

"Provided that, when the complaint is made in writing, the Magistrate need not examine the complainant and the witnesses."

(a) If a public servant acting or purporting to act in discharge of his official duties or a Court has made the complaint;"

With these observations, this application under Section 528 BNSS is finally disposed of.

Order Date :- 12.8.2025 Nitin Verma

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