HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39953 of 2024 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE TEJ PRATAP TIWARI, J. 1. Heard Sri Vishesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed to quash the order dated 22.10.2024 passed by the District & Sessions Judge, Mirzapur in Criminal Revision No. 51 of 2024 (Ram Lakhan Soni Vs. State of U.P. and another) as well as the order dated 13.03.2024 passed by C.J.M. Mirzapur in Case No. 5000 of 2019 (New No. 2601 of 2024) (State Vs. Kotwali Katra District Mirzapur) under Sections 323, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Katra, District Mirzapur, pending in the Court of C.J.M., Mirzapur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants argued that charged Sections are bailable Sections and the learned Magistrate may pass an order taking cognizance if he so desires by proceeding under Chapter XV of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is further argued that the order impugned has been challenged and reliance has been placed to explanation 2(d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is argued that no permission was taken under Section 155 (2) Cr.P.C. and charge sheet has been submitted in non cognizable offence. Learned Counsel has relied upon a Judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009(64) ACC 296 M/s Eicher Tractor Ltd. and others Vs. Harihar Singh and another as well as another reported Judgement of this Court reported in 2008 (1) JIC 220 (All) Awdesh Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P. and others in support of his contention. 4. Learned A.G.A. has stated that no useful purpose would be served in Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vishesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ram Lakhan Soni .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) issuing notice to the opposite party no. 2 as it will only delay the proceedings of the present case. 5. The order taking cognizance has been passed and it is argued that charge sheet has been submitted under the charged sections which are non cognizable offence. Reliance has been place on Explanation to Section 2(d) of Code of Criminal Procedure, which reads as follows:- "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 complaint." 6. Therefore, on the basis of Explanation which has been interpreted in a Single Judge decision of this Court reported in 2007 (3) JIC 654 (All); 2007 (9) ADJ 478 Dr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and another, it has been held that when the charge sheet is only of non cognizable offences, in view of the aforesaid provision, the charge sheet should be treated as a complaint. The argument is well founded and the order taking cognizance/summoning is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Court concerned and now the Magistrate may pass an order taking cognizance if, he so chooses, by proceedings in this matter as a complaint case under Chapter XV of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He can also keep this fact in mind that in view of the proviso (a) to Section 200 Cr.P.C., which reads as follows:- "Provided that, when the complaint is made in writing, the Magistrate need not examine the complainant and the witnesses-- (a) If a public servant acting or purporting to act in discharge of his official duties or a Court has made the complaint;" 7. With these observations, this application is finally disposed of. October 13, 2025 NSC A482 No. 39953 of 2024 2 (Tej Pratap Tiwari,J.) Digitally signed by :- NARENDRA SINGH CHAUDHARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad