Hon’ble Ravindra Nath Kakkar, J.—Heard learned counsel for the revisionists and learned A.G.A.

2. This criminal revision has been preferred against the order dated 23.11.2010 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah in Case No. 1804 of 2010 (State v. Bahori and others).

3. Learned counsel for the revisionists contended that after investigation police submitted the charge-sheet under Sections 427, 504, 506 IPC which discloses non cognizable offences, therefore, in view of Section 2(d) of the Cr.P.C., case should not be proceeded as a police case. Further contended that charge-sheet submitted by the police in a non cognizable offences shall be treated as a complaint and the procedure prescribed for hearing of the complaint case shall be applicable to the case. In support of his contention learned counsel for the revisionists cited the following rulings: Dr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. and another, 2007(9) ADJ 478; Awadhesh Kumar and others v. State of U.P. and another, 2008(2) ADJ 253 and Dhanveer and other v. State of U.P. and another, 2010(9) ADJ 496.

4. Per contra learned A.G.A. opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionists and stated that