Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37195 Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5307 of 2025 Applicant :- Ram Teerath Saav @ Tirath Ram Sahu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vashu Deo Mishra,S.K. Mishra Nagraha,Santosh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri Vashu Deo Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Shikha Sinha, the learned AGA-I for the State and perused the records. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the application is being decided finally at this stage. 3. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C./ 528 B.N.S.S., the applicant has challenged validity of cognizance order dated 22.04.2003 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow in Criminal Case No. 1493/2003 (now case No. 7922/2012) arising out of Crime No. 33/2002, under Sections 411/24 IPC, Police Station Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow. 4. Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the cognizance order dated 22.04.2003 passed by the trial court is bad in law in as much as the trial court has taken cognizance of the offence under Section 409/411/34 IPC whereas the charge sheet does not make a mention of the offence under Section 409 IPC. Although it is not disputed that in case commission of offence under Section 409 IPC is made out from the material placed by the prosecution before the trial court, the trial court can take cognizance of the offence not mentioned in the charge sheet only by a reasoned order whereas no reason has been assigned in the present case for taking cognizance under Section 409 IPC. The learned trial court has taken cognizance of offence under Section 34 IPC also whereas the applicant is the sole accused in the present case and, therefore, Section 34 will not be attracted against the sole accused. 5. The learned AGA-I has opposed the application but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter. 6. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered view that the cognizance order dated 22.04.2003 is bad in law, so far as it relates to taking cognizance of offence under Section 409 & 34 IPC is concerned. There is no illegality in the trial court's order for taking cognizance under Section 411 IPC. 7. Accordingly, the application is partly allowed. 8. The cognizance order dated 22.04.2003 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow in Criminal Case No. 1493/2003 (now case No. 7922/2012) whereby the trial court has taken cognizance of the offences under Section 409/34 IPC is set aside leaving it open to the trial court to pass fresh reasoned order in accordance with law. Order Date :- 1.7.2025 Pradeep/- Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench