The court emphasized the necessity for a Magistrate to provide the accused an opportunity to be heard before taking cognizance of complaints as mandated by the BNSS.

JUDGMENT :

PURNENDU SINGH, J.

1. Heard Mr. Ravi Ranjan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned APP for the State.

2. The present application has been filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 for quashing of the Summoning Order dated 27.08.2025 and all consequential proceedings arising out of the Complaint Case No. 130C/2025 (Ladli Khatoon v. Manoj Dugar & Anr.) pending before the Learned JMFC-cum-Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)-II, Kishanganj, whereby and whereunder, the learned Magistrate erroneously took cognizance of offences and passed summoning order dated 27.08.2025 against the petitioner under Section 126(2), 115(2), 318(4), 352, read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the son of the complainant, namely, Md. Faiyaz alias Parvez, is a tailor running a shop on a footpath at Nemchand Road and had past business dealings with the petitioner’s cloth shop, during which Rs. 4,000/- was allegedly due. On 22.02.2025, after completing stitching work, a dispute arose over payment and settlement of accounts. In the evening, the petitioner allegedly abused her son and later, at his shop, on the basis of incorrect calculations claimed Rs. 5,000/- due to be paid by the complainant’s son. When his son protested, the petitioner, allegedly instigated his staff to assault him. The petitioner then allegedly called the owner of Raymonds Showroom and Councilor Manish Jalan, who arrived with several staff members and assaulted the complainant’s son, causing injuries. One well wisher Bipul Aggarwal, who tried to mediate, was also assaulted. The complainant’s son managed to escape and received treatment at Kishanganj Hospital. Due to fear, the complainant did not approach the police on the same day but lodged a written complaint on 23.02.2025 and informed senior police officials by email. No action has allegedly been taken so far.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the allegation alleged against the petitioner by the complainant is false and concocted in order to harass the petitioner and to save his skin from the F.I.R. being Kishanganj P.S. Case No. 99 of 2025 filed by the petitioner earlier to the present complaint.

5. Learned APP for the State submitted that there is no infirmity in the order taking cognizance dated 27.08.2025 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class-cum-Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)-II, Kishanganj in Complaint Case No. 130C/2025, as such, no interference is required by this Court.

6. Heard the parties.

7. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ("BNSS"), and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 became effective on July 1, 2024, repealing Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("CrPC"), and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, respectively. The BNSS introduced substantive procedural reforms aimed at modernising and streamlining the criminal justice system. Among the most consequential changes is the replacement of Section 200 of the CrPC with Section 223 of the BNSS, signifying a new dimension to the criminal complaint process in India.

8. Under the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), if the police fail to register a First Information Report ("FIR"), the complainant may approach any Magistrate under Section 190 of the CrPC to seek a direction for the police to investigate the complaint under Section 156(1). However, if the Magistrate finds that the allegations disclose a cognizable offence and forwarding