HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 31379 of 2026 Court No. - 80 HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Mr. Rajeev Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application has been filed with a prayer to allow this application and set aside the order dated 31.03.2026 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court no. 09, Farrukhabad in Session Case No. 184 of 2021 (State v. Jawahar Lal & others), arising out of Case Crime no. 630/2018 Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Maudarwaja, District Farrukhabad and direct the learned trial Court to also frame the charge under Section 307 I.P.C. alongwith the other Sections against the opposite party no. 2 to 18. 3. Briefly stated, the applicant, first informant, Dharm Singh, lodged an FIR against the opposite party Nos. 2 to 18 and several others on 13.11.2018 i.e., Case Crime No. 630 of 2018 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Maudarwaja, District Farrukhabad wherein after the investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted on 29.06.2019 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506 IPC and the cognizance was taken by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Farrukhabad on 15.07.2019 under Sections under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506 IPC and summoned the respondent-accused to face trial. Thereafter, the applicant/first informant filed an application before the learned Magistrate as well as learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/F.T.C., Farrukhabad for summoning the accused persons under Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajeev Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Dharm Singh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 17 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Section 307 IPC which was rejected by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/F.T.C., vide order dated 31.03.2026. Hence, the present petition. 4. The main submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that though the FIR was lodged under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C., but due to lapse on the part of the Investigating Officer, the charge sheet was submitted under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506 IPC. The learned Magistrate while taking cognizance did not consider the entire material on record and had taken the cognizance under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506 IPC, without application of judicial mind, in a cursory manner. 5. Per contra, learned AGA for the State submitted that there is no illegality in the order impugned. It is further submitted that since the matter emerges out of a Police case, therefore, addition or subtraction of Sections will have to be determined at the time of framing of charges. In this regard, he has relied upon the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in State of Guajart v. Girish Radhkrishnan Varde; (2014) 3 SCC 659 wherein it has been held that "Since the instant case is based on the FIR lodged before the police, the correct stage for addition or subtraction of the Sections will have to be determined at the time of framing of charge." 6. In view of the above, there in no illegality in the order impugned. No interefence is required for. 7. Accordingly, the present application is dismissed. September 18, 2026 Aditya Tripathi NA528 No. 31379 of 2026 2 (Nand Prabha Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- ADITYA TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad