RAMASHRYA PRASADversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                  CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4329 of 2026

Ramashrya Prasad
                                                           .....Appellant(s)
                                  Versus

State Of U.P. And 7 Others
                                                         .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s)       : Shriprakash Shrivastava
Counsel for Respondent(s)      : Anupam Bindra, G.A., Nainshi
                                 Srivastava, Narendra Nath Tripathi,
                                 Puneet Bhadauria

Court No. - 93
                      HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J.

1. Heard Shri Shriprakash Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appellant,
Ms. Nainshi Srivastava, learned counsel for O.P. Nos.2, 5 and 6, Shri
Puneet Bhadauria, learned counsel for O.P. Nos.7 and 8 and learned AGA
for the State.

2. The present criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant against the
impugned order dated 13.03.2026 passed by learned Special Judge
(S.C./S.T. Act), Kushinagar at Padrauna in Misc. Criminal Case No.20 of
2026 (Ramashrya Prasad vs. Police UP-Nirikshak Raj Narayan Yadav and
others), P.S.- Ahirauli Bazar, District- Kushinagar.


3. The application under Section 173(4) of the BNSS was moved by the
complainant/victim-appellant herein, Ramashrya Prasad, against seven
accused persons, namely, Amerika, Manish, Satyaveer, Ajay, Anand
Prakash @ Awdhesh, Sub-Inspector Raj Narayan Yadav and Sub-
Inspector Atul Kumar Bind. The allegation against the accused persons is
that they committed gang rape upon the victim and also used casteist slurs
against him.


4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned court below
has erred in treating the application under Section 173(4) BNSS as a
complaint. It is submitted that the allegations disclose cognizable offences
and require proper investigation, particularly for collecting the call
recordings, Call Detail Records (CDRs) and other electronic evidence
                                                         CRLA No. 4329 of 2026
                                2

relating to the alleged threats and attempts by opposite party Nos. 7 and 8,
in collusion with opposite party Nos. 2 to 6, to pressurise the appellant
and his family to compromise Case Crime No. 296 of 2025. It is further
submitted that despite repeated applications before the Superintendent of
Police and the police authorities, no fair investigation was conducted. The
appellant also relies upon the alleged violation of the provisions of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules,
1995, particularly Rules 5 and 12, and submits that the impugned order
dated 13.03.2026 is based on an erroneous appreciation of the material on
record. It is, therefore, prayed that the impugned order be set
aside/modified and appropriate directions be issued for registration and
fair investigation of the case.


5. Per contra, learned AGA, learned counsel for the opposite party no.7
and 8, learned counsel for opposite party no.2,5 and 6 submit that the
learned court below has committed no illegality in passing the impugned
order. It is submitted that Case Crime No. 296 of 2025, under Sections
64(1), 62 and 351(3) BNS, has already been registered at Police Station
Ahirauli Bazar, District Kushinagar, and investigation in the said case has
been undertaken by the concerned investigating officers, who have
already submitted the charge-sheet. Thus, the allegations raised by the
appellant are already the subject matter of investigation in the existing
criminal case and no separate police investigation on the application
under Section 173(4) BNSS is warranted. The learned trial court, after
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, has rightly treated the
application as a complaint in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in Mohd. Yusuf v. Smt. Afaq Jahan, 2006 (54) ACC 530
(SC), and this Court in Shukhlasi v. State of U.P., 2007 (59) ACC 739
(All) (DB). Hence, the appeal is liable to be dismissed.

6. In the present case, admittedly, the allegations against the accused
persons are of committing rape and other offences, as enumerated in the
application itself. In paragraph 2 of the application, it has been stated that
Case Crime No. 296 of 2025, under Sections 61(1), 62 and 351(3) of the
BNSS, was registered and the investigation thereof is going on. It has
further been stated that opposite party Nos. 7 and are the investigating
officers and that the charge-sheet has already been filed. Considering the
                                                                                           CRLA No. 4329 of 2026
                                                                   3

                                    facts and circumstances of the case, the learned trial court has rightly
                                    treated the application as a complaint, relying upon the judgment of the
                                    Hon'ble Apex Court in Mohd. Yusuf v. Smt. Afaq Jahan, 2006 (54) ACC
                                    530 (SC), as well as the judgment of this Court in Sukhwasi v. State of
                                    U.P., 2007 (59) ACC 739 (All-DB).


                                    7. Thus, having considered the entire facts and circumstances of the case,
                                    the material and evidence available on record, the submissions advanced
                                    by the learned counsel for the parties, this court is of the considered
                                    opinion that the learned trial court has rightly treated the application of
                                    the appellant filed under Section 173(4) BNSS into complaint. The
                                    impugned order dated 13.03.2026 does not suffer from any illegality,
                                    perversity or infirmity warranting interference by this Court.


                                    8. The appeal, being devoid of merits, is accordingly dismissed.


                                    9. Registrar (Compliance) is directed to communicate the instant order to
                                    the court concerned through District and Sessions Judge, Kushinagar at
                                    Padrauna by e-mail/FAX within three days.


                                                                                              (Santosh Rai,J.)
                                    September 8, 2026
                                    Ankit.




Digitally signed by :-
ANKIT VISHWAKARMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad