HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 37798 of 2025 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. The instant application is being heard and disposed off finally with the consent of both the parties without exchange of pleadings. 2. Heard Sri Syed Imran Ibrahim, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vikas Sahay, learned AGA for the State. 3. By way of instant application following prayer has been made:- "It is therefore, Most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court may graciously be pleased to allow the present application and quash the summoning order dated 24.02.2023 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalesar, District Etah, charge sheet dated 06.07.2022 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.595 of 2023 (State Vs. Rameshwar Singh Yadav) arising out of Case Crime No. 38 of 2022 under Sections 188, and 171-H IPC, Police Station Aliganj, District Etah, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalesar, District Etah. This Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to stay the further proceedings of Criminal Case No. 595 of 2023 (State Vs. Rameshwar Singh Yadav) arising out of Case Crime No. 38 of 2022 under Sections 188, and 171-H IPC, Police Station Aliganj, District Etah, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalesar, District Etah, during the pendency of the present application before this Hon'ble Court otherwise the applicants would suffer irreparable loss and injury." 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that FIR of the present case Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Praveen Kumar Singh, Syed Imran Ibrahim Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rameshwar Singh Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) was lodged against the applicant and others on 18.02.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 188 and 171-H IPC and after investigation charge sheet has also been filed against the applicant under Sections 188 and 171-H IPC and after taking cognizance on the police report submitted under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. court concerned proceeded with the matter and at present trial of the case is pending before the trial court as State case. 5. He further submitted that as per provisions of Section 195(1)(a)(i) Cr.P.C., on the police report cognizance cannot be taken for the offence under Section 188 IPC. He further submitted that as far as offence under Section 171-H IPC is concerned, admittedly there is no allegation that applicant incurred any illegal payment in connection of an election, therefore, prima facie no offence under Section 171H IPC is made out. He next submits, even offence under Section 171H IPC is non-cognizable and therefore, learned court could not even take cognizance on police report even for offence under Section 171H IPC. 6. He further submitted that therefore, entire proceeding pending against the applicant is liable to be quashed. 7. Per contra, learned AGA however, opposed the prayer but fairly conceded that applicant is facing trial for the offences under Sections 188 and 171-H IPC on the basis of police report submitted under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. and as per Section 195(1)(a)(i) Cr.P.C., on the police report cognizance cannot be taken for the offence under Section 188 IPC. He further could not dispute, to constitute an offence under Section 171H IPC it is necessary that accused should incurred expenses in connection of an election without any authorization of a candidate and there is no such allegation in the instant matter against the applicant. 8. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. From the record, it reflects, FIR was lodged against the applicant and others under Sections 188 and 171-H IPC and after investigation, charge sheet has also been filed against the applicant for the offences under Sections 188 and 171-H IPC. 10. Record also suggests that after submission of charge sheet under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. court concerned took the cognizance and proceeded with the matter as State case and therefore applicant is facing trial of the present case for offence punishable under Section 188 and 171H IPC. 11. According to Section 195(1)(a)(i) Cr.P.C., court cannot take cognizance on the police report submitted under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. for the offence under Section 188 IPC and as offence under Section 171-H IPC is non- NA528 No. 37798 of 2025 2 cognizable, therefore, even court concerned can not take cognizance for this offence on the police report submitted under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., therefore, it reflects, cognizance order dated 24.02.2023 is bad and proceeding of the case as State case initiated on the basis of police report submitted under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. is also bad. 12. Further, there is no allegation that applicant incurred expenses in connection with an election without consent or authorization of a candidate, therefore, even prima facie no offence under Section 171H IPC is made out as to constitute an offence under Section 171H IPC it is necessary that an accused must incurred expenses in connection of an election. 13. Therefore, from the discussion made above, cognizance order dated 24.02.2023 passed by the court concerned and proceeding pending against the applicant are illegal and are accordingly quashed. 14. The instant application stands allowed. September 25, 2025 KK Patel NA528 No. 37798 of 2025 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad