HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 36888 of 2026 Court No. - 79 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State. 2. The present application has been preferred for seeking quashing of cognizance/summoning order dated 22.12.2022 passed by Civil Judge (S.D.)/ A.C.J.M, Kushinagar at Padrauna, as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.15790 of 2022 (State vs. Godhan Gaud and others) arising out of Case Crime No.23 of 2022, under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Captanganj, District Kushi Nagar, pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (S.D.)/ A.C.J.M, Kushinagar at Padrauna. 3. Learned counsel for applicants has made only one submission before the Court that offences under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 IPC are non- cognizable and in view of the explanation to Section 2(d) Cr.P.C., the chargesheet filed by the Investigating Officer concerned cannot proceed as a police case and the same is liable to be proceeded with as a complaint case. In support of his submission, learned counsel of applicants has placed reliance upon the judgment passed in the case of Shakila Bano and others Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2008 (61) ACC 636. 4. Although, learned AGA opposed the prayer sought through the instant application but did not dispute the submissions so made by learned counsel for applicants. 5. Since the arguments as advanced on behalf of learned counsel for applicants, are based on legal issue, no notice is required to be issued to opposite party no.2. 6. Before proceeding further, the relevant provisions of Section 2 (d) of Cr.P.C. are being reproduced for ready reference as under:- Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajneesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Malati Devi And 3 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) "2. Definitions.-In this Code, unless the context otherwise requires,- (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 complaint; and the police officer by whom such report is made shall be deemed to be the complainant." 7. In view of the above explanation, charge sheet submitted by the concerned Investigating Officer in the present case under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 I.P.C. shall be treated as complaint and it is to be decided as complaint and the learned Magistrate fell in legal error by taking cognizance as State case and the orders passed by him is, therefore, liable to be set aside. 8. In view thereof, order dated 22.12.2022 passed in Criminal Case No.15790 of 2022 (State vs. Godhan Gaud and others) arising out of Case Crime No.23 of 2022, summoning the applicants on the basis of chargesheet submitted by concerned Investigating Officer under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 I.P.C. treating the same as State case, is set aside. 9. Accordingly, the instant application is partly allowed. 10. However, it is made clear that this order shall not preclude the learned court concerned to proceed with the case treating it as complaint case, if required, in accordance with law. September 11, 2026 Ashish/- NA528 No. 36888 of 2026 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHISH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad