HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 3381 of 2025 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE TEJ PRATAP TIWARI, J. 1. Heard Sri Ramesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants to quash entire proceeding of Case no. 2931/IX/2024 (State versus Shivsharan Singh @ Badkauna and another), arising out of Case Crime no. 125/2024, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Tindwari, District Banda, charge sheet no. 144 of 2024 dated 18.08.2024 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 19.10.2024 pending before the learned C.J.M., Banda. 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) : Ramesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shivsharan Singh Alias Badkauna And Another .....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. 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 9, 2025 PS NA528 No. 3381 of 2025 2 (Tej Pratap Tiwari,J.) Digitally signed by :- POOJA SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- POOJA SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad