Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 188144 (ALL)

SMT CHANDRIMA GHOSH v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

NA528/40488/2024 · 2025-01-22

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:11797 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 40488 of 2024 Applicant :- Smt Chandrima Ghosh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar,Saushthav Guha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J. 1. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant has prayed for and is permitted to amend the section 303 I.P. as correct section 323 I.P.C., as averred in the instant application, during course of the day. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record on board. 3. Applicant has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court u/s 528 of B.N.S.S. for quashing the entire proceedings of Crl. Case No. 5073 of 2019 (State Vs. Smt. Chandrima Ghosh), relating to N.C.R. No. 57 of 2019, u/s 323 IPC, Police Station- Surajpur, District- Gautam Budh Nagar, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 2nd, Gautam Budh Nagar, as well as impugned charge sheet no. 161/2019 dated 27.03.2019 and impugned order dated 21.10.2019. 4. Solitary submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicant is that learned Magistrate has illegally taken cognizance of offence on the basis of police report, whereas the offence disclosed in the charge sheet is a non-cognizable and bailable, therefore, police report should have been considered as a complaint under the law as enunciated in explanation to Section 2(d) Cr.P.C. Record evince that opposite party no.2 has lodged an N.C.R. being N.C.R. No. 0057 of 2019 dated 13.03.2019 under Section 323 I.P.C. After investigation, Investigating Officer has submitted charge sheet dated 27.04.2019 arraigning the present applicant under Section 323 I.P.C. Thus, police report has been submitted disclosing the offence which is non-cognizable/bailable as per definition of 'complaint' as enunciated u/s 2(d) of Cr.P.C. Any such report which has been submitted by Police disclosing the non-cognizable offence shall be considered as a complaint and the police officer concerned, who has submitted the police report shall be treated as the complainant. For ready reference, Section 2(d) of Cr.P.C. is quoted 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 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;" Explanation to Section 2(d) as mentioned above, clearly denotes that after investigation, if it is found that offence in question is non-cognizable then the matter should be treated as complaint, and the police officer by whom such report is made, shall be deemed to be the complainant. 5. Having considered the aforesaid provision of law in the given circumstances of the present case, I am of the considered view that police has submitted the charge sheet disclosing the non- cognizable offence under Section 323 I.P.C., therefore, learned Magistrate should have treated the aforesaid police report as a complaint, thus, he has committed error while taking the cognizance of offence treating the police report as a police case. 6. In this conspectus as above, instant application succeeds and is allowed. Cognizance order dated 21.10.2019 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate- Gautam Budh Nagar is quashed. Parties are hereby relegated before the court below to get a fresh appropriate order passed in the light of the observation as made above, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month from the date of production of certified copy of this order. 7. Office is directed to transmit order of the date to the court concerned, forthwith. Order Date :- 23.1.2025 Sumit K. Digitally signed by :- SUMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad