HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 46196 of 2025 Court No. - 75 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Manish Yadav, learned cousnel appearing on behalf of opposite party no.2 as well as learned AGA for the State. 2. The present application has been preferred for seeking quashing of chargesheet dated 13.05.2025 and cognizance order dated 04.10.2025 along with entire proceedings of Case No.37223 of 2025 (State Vs. Saroj and others), arising out of Case Crime No.716 of 2024, under Section 115(2) of BNS, P.S. Tundla, District Firozabad, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad. 3. Learned counsel for applicants has made only one submission before the Court that offence under Section 115(2) of BNS is non-cognizable and in view of the explanation to Section 2(1)(h) of BNSS, the charge sheet filed by the Investigating Officer concerned cannot proceed as a police case and the same is liable to be proceeded with as a complaint case. In support of his submission, learned counsel of applicant has placed reliance upon the judgment passed in the case of Shakila Bano and others Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2008 (61) ACC 636. 4. Although, learned AGA as well as learned cousnel appearing on behalf of opposite party no.2 opposed the prayer sought through the instant application but did not dispute the submissions so made by learned counsel for applicants. 5. Before proceeding further, the relevant provisions of Section 2(1)(h) of BNSS are being reproduced for ready reference as under:- "2. Definitions.-(1) In this Sanhita, unless the context otherwise Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anuj Agarwal, Arvind Agrawal Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Manish Yadav Smt Rubi And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) requires,- (h) "complaint" means any allegation made orally or in writing to a Magistrate, with a view to his taking action under this Sanhita, 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 complaint; and the police officer by whom such report is made shall be deemed to be the complainant." 6. In view of the above explanation, charge sheet submitted by the concerned Investigating Officer in the present case under Section 115(2) of BNS, should have been treated as complaint and it is to be decided as complaint but the learned Magistrate fell in legal error by taking cognizance as State case and the orders passed by him is, therefore, liable to be set aside. 7. In view thereof, order dated 04.10.2025 passed in Case No.37223 of 2025 (State Vs. Saroj and others), arising out of Case Crime No.716 of 2024 summoning the applicants on the basis of chargesheet submitted by concerned Investigating Officer under Section 115(2) of BNS treating the same as State case, is set aside. 8. Accordingly, the instant application is partly allowed. 9. However, it is made clear that this order shall not preclude the learned court concerned to proceed with the case treating it as complaint case, if required, in accordance with law. March 19, 2026 Vivek Kr. NA528 No. 46196 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad