NA528/16053/2026 of AJAY TIWARI @ KALLU AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 16053 of 2026
Court No. - 77
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
chargesheet dated 25.10.2025 and cognizance order dated 26.11.2025 along
with entire proceedings of Case No.1173/IX of 2025 (State Vs. Ajay Tiwari
@ Kallu and others), arising out of Case Crime No.299 of 2025, under
Section 221, 352, 351(3) of BNS, P.S. Girwan, District Banda, pending in
the court of learned Additional Civil Judge (J.D.)-III/ Judicial Magistrate,
Banda.
3. Learned counsel for applicants has made only one submission before the
Court that offences under Section 221, 352, 351(3) of BNS are non-
cognizable and in view of the explanation to Section 2(1)(h) of BNSS, the
charge sheet 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. Since the argument as advanced on behalf of learned counsel for
applicants, is based on legal issue, no notice is required to be issued to
opposite party no.2.
5. Although, learned AGA opposed the prayer sought through the instant
application but did not dispute the submissions so made by learned counsel
for applicants.
6. Before proceeding further, the relevant provisions of Section 2(1)(h) of
BNSS are being reproduced for ready reference as under:-
Versus
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anant Prakash Swarnkar, Ram Raksha
Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Ajay Tiwari @ Kallu And Another
.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
"2. Definitions.-(1) In this Sanhita, unless the context otherwise
requires,-
(h) "complaint" means any allegation made orally or in writing
to a Magistrate, with a view to his taking action under this
Sanhita, 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 Section 221, 352, 351(3) of
BNS, should have been treated as complaint and it is to be decided as
complaint but 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 26.11.2025 passed in Case No.1173/IX of
2025 (State Vs. Ajay Tiwari @ Kallu and others), arising out of Case Crime
No.299 of 2025, summoning the applicants on the basis of chargesheet
submitted by concerned Investigating Officer under Section 221, 352, 351(3)
of BNS 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.
May 6, 2026
Vivek Kr.
NA528 No. 16053 of 2026
2
(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VIVEK KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad