Allahabad High Court
Ram Singh Yadav And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. ... on 30 October, 2025
Author: Pramod Kumar Srivastava
Bench: Pramod Kumar Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:67696
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9075 of 2025
Ram Singh Yadav And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)
:
Ankit Kumar, Rishabh Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
G.A.
Court No. - 28
HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed with the prayer to quash the chargesheet No. 01 of 2024, dated 22.12.2024 in Criminal Case No. 28218 of 2025, in Case Crime No. 296 of 2024, under Section 504 IPC, Police Station Sushant Golf City, Lucknow and summoning order dated 10.03.2025 as well as entire proceedings sin pursuance thereof.
The brief facts of the case are that an FIR under Section 504 IPC has been lodged against the applicants and the police, after investigation, has filed the chargesheet under Section 504 IPC.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that Section 504 IPC is non-cognizable offence and the chargesheet submitted by the police after investigation shall be deemed to be a complaint under Section 2(d) Cr.P.C, therefore, the cognizance taken by the Magistrate is against the law.
Learned counsel for applicants placed reliance upon following judgments of this Court:
(i) 2007(9) ADJ 478 Allahabad High Court, Dr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and another.
(ii) 2013(4) ADJ 474 Allahabad High Court, Ghansyam Dubey @ Litile and others Vs. State of U.P. and another.
(iii) Judgment and order dated 26.11.2013 passed by Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court in Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.42698 of 2013 (Alok Kumar Shukla Vs. State of U.p. and another).
(iv) Judgment and order dated 30.10.2014 passed by Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court in Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.42082 of 2014 (Budhi Ram and 3 others Vs. State of U.P. and another).
Learned AGA has very fairly submitted that as the offence is non-cognizable, even after the chargesheet has been filed by the police, the case is to be treated as a complaint case and not a State case as per Section 2(d) Cr.P.C, read with Section 155(2) and 155(3) of Cr.P.C.
After hearing learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State, it is found that the applicants were named in the FIR lodged under Section 504 IPC and the chargesheet has been filed under Section 504 IPC. The Police, after investigation, has filed the chargesheet under Section 155 (2) Cr.P.C. For convenience, Section 2(d) Cr.P.C is quoted hereinbelow:-
Section 2(d) Cr.P.C. defines complaint which is as follows:
"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".
"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;
Reading of explanation added to Section 2(d) shows that this explanation speaks about cases where police has investigated a cognizable case but investigation made discloses a non-cognizable offence.
From the perusal of Section 2(d) Cr.P.C, it is clear that though the complaint does not include police report, but the explanation of Section 2(d) Cr.P.C provides that if after investigation of case, the police report is submitted by the police officer regarding non-cognizable offence, then the same shall be treated to be "complaint", therefore, apart from making allegation to Magistrate for taking action against a person who has committed an offence but also the police report/chargesheet of non-cognizable offence will also be deemed to be a "complaint".
In the case of Keshab Lal Thakur Vs. State of Bihar (1996) 11 S.C.C. 55) Hon'ble Apex Court has already held that explanation to Section 2(d) of the Code covers only those cases where the police initiates investigation into a cognizable offence but the offence is turned into a non cognizable offence.
In the case of 2007(9) ADJ 478 Allahabad High Court, Dr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and another, the case was originally registered under sections 307 I.P.C. and after investigation non-cognizable offence punishable under section 504 I.P.C. was found. Therefore, charge sheet submitted for offence punishable under section 504 I.P.C. was held to be complainant under section 2(d) of Cr.P.C.
In the case of Alok Kumar Shukla Vs. State of U.P. and another mentioned above police submitted charge sheet in non-cognizable offence without order of Magistrate under section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Therefore charge sheet submitted by police was held to be complaint under section 2(d) of Cr.P.C.
It is relevant at this juncture to go through provisions of Section 155(2) and (3) of Criminal Procedure Code which are reproduced below:-
Section 155(2) Cr.P.C.
"No police officer shall investigate a non-cognizable case without the order of a Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial."
Section 155(3) Cr.P.C.
"Any police officer receiving such order may exercise the same powers in respect of the investigation (except the power to arrest without warrant) as an officer in charge of a police station may exercise in a cognizable case."
After reading of above-quoted provisions, the chargesheet filed by the Police for non-cognizable offence, the same shall be treated as complaint case not as state case. The court below may proceed in the matter following the procedure provided for complaint case in non-cognizable offences.
In view of the discussion made above, the impugned order dated 10.03.2025 is hereby quashed. The matter is remitted back to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow to pass the order on the point of summoning afresh, expeditiously in accordance with law.
With these observations and directions, the application is allowed.
(Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.)
October 30, 2025
kkv/
