Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:35907 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 8028 of 2025 Applicant :- Shiv Krishan Mishra And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Kanojia,Saushthav Guha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J. 1. Sri Rajesh Kumar Kanojia, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Abhishek Kuamr, learned A.G.A. for the State are present. 2. The present application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1004 of 2012 (State Vs. Krishna Mishra), arising out of Case Crime No. 170 of 2011, under Sections 323, 504 of I.P.C., Police Station Sisamau, District Kanpur Nagar as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 3.11.2011 and orders dated 19.11.2014 and 21.9.2024, whereby Non Bailable Warrant and proceedings under Section 82, Cr.P.C. has been initiated against the applicants, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 1, Kanpur Nagar. 3. Delay in filing the present application is explained. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the cognizance/summoning order dated 3.11.2011 has been passed against the applicants and the magistrate took cognizance as a police case, which is against the provision of Section 2(d) of Cr.P.C. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the offence punishable under Sections 323, 504 of I.P.C. is non-cognizable offence and as per provision of Section 2(d) of Cr.P.C. the case could not be a State case and it has been proceeded as a State case, the cognizance/ summoning order is an abuse of the process of law. 6. Section 2(d) of Cr.P.C. is reproduced herein below: 2 (d)"complaint" means any allegation made orally or in writing to a Magistrate, with a view to his taking action under this Code, 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 complainant, and the police officer by whom such report is made shall be deemed to be the complainant; 7. A bare perusal of explanation added to Section 2(d) shows that this explanation speaks about cases where police has investigated a cognizable case but investigation made discloses a non-cognizable offence. 8. In view of what has been stated above, the present application is disposed of. The order impugned dated 3.11.2011 passed by Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 1, Kanpur Nagar is, hereby, quashed. The matter is remanded back to the court concerned and the Magistrate is directed to pass a fresh order after applying the judicial mind. Order Date :- 11.3.2025 T. Sinha Digitally signed by :- TRIPTI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad