Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:35229 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 7952 of 2025 Applicant :- Taswar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sundeep Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State, and perused the record. 2. The present application has been filed seeking the quashing of the summoning order dated 29.04.2023, passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Court No. 2, Muzaffar Nagar, in F.R. No. 18/12 of 2019, titled Smt. Vasila v. Tasawar and Another, as well as the entire proceedings of S.S.T. No. 923/9 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 204 of 2018, under Sections 353, 354-A of the I.P.C. registered at P.S. Chapar, District Muzaffar Nagar. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned order is in contravention of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the cases of Subrata Choudhury @ Santosh Choudhury & Others v. The State of Assam and Another; [2024] 12 S.C.R. 1 and Mukhtar Zaidi v. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Another; [2024] 4 S.C.R. 655. To substantiate this contention, learned counsel has drawn attention to the finding recorded by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, in which the protest petition was allowed with the finding to register the case as state case and further summoned the accused. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that it is settled law that where the police have filed a final report, and on a protest petition by the complainant, the Magistrate has four courses of action available. This position has culled out in Mukhtar Zaidi (supra), which is reproduced as follows: "1- To accept the report and to drop the proceedings. 2 - To direct further investigation to be made by the police. 3- To investigate himself or refer the investigation to be made by another Magistrate under Section 159, Cr.P.C., and 4- To take cognizance of the offence under Section 200, Cr.P.C., as private complaint when materials are sufficient in his opinion as if the complaint is prepared for that purpose." 5. Upon considering the facts of the present case, it is clear that the trial court has allowed the protest petition and recorded that the case shall be treated as a state case, and thereby summoned the applicant. Therefore, the summoning order is legally flawed. 6. Based on aforesaid deliberations and after considering the material on record, this Court is of the view that the impugned order dated 29.04.2023, passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Court No. 2, Muzaffar Nagar, in F.R. No. 18/12 of 2019, titled Smt. Vasila v. Tasawar and Another, is liable to be quashed. 7. Thus, the impugned order dated 29.04.2023 is hereby quashed. The instant application is, accordingly, allowed. The learned Magistrate may treat the protest petition as a complaint case, if the merits of the case so allow, and proceed accordingly in accordance with law. Order Date :- 11.3.2025 Shafique Justice Vinod Diwakar Digitally signed by :- SAFIKUR RAHAMAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad