Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:26152 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 41421 of 2024 Applicant :- Saurav And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Vashistha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J. 1. Shri Ajay Kumar Vashistha, learned counsel for the applicants and Ms. Ladly Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State are present. 2. The Present application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the order dated 28.06.2024 passed by Additional Civil Judge (S.D.) Etah, in Criminal Case No. 8774 of 2024 (State v. Saurav and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 23 of 2024, under Sections 323 and 504 of I.P.C., P.S. Pilua, District Etah, whereby cognizance has been taken as a State case. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that F.I.R. dated 19.02.2024 under Section 154 of Cr.P.C has been registered. It is further submitted that the report has been lodged in non-cognizable offence, which is against the provision of law. It is further submitted that the cognizance order has been passed without considering the facts that a report under Section 154 of Cr.P.C. has been lodged for non-cognizanable offences. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the offence punishable under Sections 323 and 504 of I.P.C. are non- cognizable offence and as per provision of Section 2(d) of Cr.P.C. the case could not be a State case and it has been proceeded as a State case, the cognizance/ summoning order is an abuse of the process of law. 5. Section 2(d) of Cr.P.C. is reproduced herein below: (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 complainant, and the police officer by whom such report is made shall be deemed to be the complainant; 6. A bare perusal 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. 7. In view of what has been stated above, the present application is disposed of. The order impugned dated 28.06.2024 passed by Additional Civil Judge (S.D.) Etah, is, hereby, quashed. The matter is remanded back to the Court concerned and the learned Magistrate is directed to pass a fresh order after applying the judicial mind. Order Date :- 24.2.2025 Akram Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AKRAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AKRAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad