Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:33727 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 5583 of 2025 Applicant :- Yogendra Alias Doly And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shishir Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Shishir Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Vikash Sharma, learned State Law Officer for the State- opposite party. 2. A joint statement has been made by the learned State Law Officer that since legal questions are involved in the present application, thus, he does not propose to file any response and the application be decided on the basis of the documents available on record. 3. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the applicants to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.7757 of 2023 (State Vs. Yogendra @ Doly and others), arising out of case crime no.173 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504 of IPC, Police Station- Dankaur, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, pending before the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Gautam Buddh Nagar . 4. Learned counsel for the applicants has argued that an FIR stood lodged against the applicants on 05.07.02023, being FIR No.0173 of 2023, under Sections 323, 307 and 506 of IPC relatable to the commission of the offences on 10.11.2022. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the charge-sheet stood submitted against the applicants under Section 323 and 506 IPC, however, the court below has taken cognizance on 20.11.2023 under Section 323 and 504 IPC, according to the learned counsel for the applicants in view of the provisions contained under Section 2(d) of the Cr.P.C., the present case is to be proceeded as a complaint case and not as a state case. He submits that the procedures as envisaged under Section 190 (a) of the Cr.P.C. is to be resorted and not Section 190 (b). He seeks to rely upon the decision in the case of Application U/S 482 No. 32219 of 2022 (Rama Shankar Upadhayay and 3 others v. State of U.P. and another) so as to buttress his submission. 5. Learned State Law Officer does not dispute the said fact, according to him, Section 323 and 504 IPC are non-cognizable, thus, section 2(d) will come into play and the case is to be treated as a complaint case and not a state case. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records. 7. I am of the opinion that since a pure legal issue is involved, thus, notices be not issued to the opposite party no. 2. Apparently, the first information report was under Sections 323, 307 and 506, however, the charge-sheet stood submitted under Section 323 and 506 of the IPC and cognizance has been taken under Section 323 and 504 IPC by the learned Magistrate on 20.11.2023. Once Section 323 and 504 IC are non-cognizable then in the provisions contained under Section 2(d) of the Cr.P.C. read with Section 190(a) of the Cr.P.C., the case is to be proceeded as a complaint case and not as a state case, in view of the law laid down by coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Rama Shankar Upadhayay and 3 others (supra). 8. Accordingly, the present application stands allowed. 9. The cognizance order is set aside. The trial shall proceed with the case as a complaint case under Chapter-XV of the Cr.P.C., the trial court shall take for consideration as per the provisions of complaint case. Order Date :- 7.3.2025 A. Prajapati Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad