Vijay Kumar And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 5 May, 2026

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Allahabad High Court

Vijay Kumar And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 5 May, 2026

Bench: Saurabh Srivastava





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2026:AHC:104502
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 
 
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 17125 of 2026   
 
   Vijay Kumar And 2 Others    
 
  .....Applicant(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State of U.P. and Another    
 
  .....Opposite Party(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Applicant(s)   
 
:   
 
Sanjay Srivastava   
 
  
 
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)   
 
:   
 
G.A.   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 77
 
   
 
 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 charge sheet dated 13.8.2022, cognizance/summoning order dated 10.4.2023 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Mawana, Meerut and entire proceeding of Criminal Case no. 855 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime no. 291 of 2021 under sections 120B, 504, 507 IPC, PS- Mawana, District Meerut.

3. Learned counsel for applicants has made only one submission before the Court that offences under Sections 120B, 504, 507 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 applicant has placed reliance upon the judgments 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 applicant.

5. Since only legal arguments have been raised at the behest of applicants, process to issue notice to opposite party no. 2 is hereby dispensed with.

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 120B, 504, 507 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 10.4.2023 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Mawana, Meerut summoning the applicants on the basis of chargesheet submitted by concerned Investigating Officer under Sections 120B, 504, 507 I.P.C. treating the same as State case, is set aside only in respect of applicant(s) herein.

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.

(Saurabh Srivastava,J.) May 5, 2026 Shaswat

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Allahabad High Court