HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8014 of 2025 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J. HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J. 1. Heard Shri D.K. Mishra, learned counsel for petitioner, Shri S.N. Tilahari, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. 2. In view of the proposed orders being passed, notice to opposite party no. 6 is dispensed with. 3. By means of the present petition, the petitioner has sought following relief:- "i). to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding opposite parties to take the appropriate action against the Head Constable Abhay Kumar Nayak posted at Police Station Ghunghter District Barabanki and another any officer who has not registered the F.I.R. as per the order dated 08.07.2025, and as per the Tehreer given by the petitioner the action may be taken as per the directions issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lalita Kumari Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in (2014) S.C.C. (Cri) page 524 within stipulated period in the interest of justice. ii). to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding opposite parties to take the appropriate action on the application dated 11.08.2025 ( Annexure No. 4 to the writ petition) moved by the petitioner in the interest of justice." Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dinesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Naushad Alam .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) 4. It is a peculiar case where despite the specific allegation being levelled by the petitioner against the accused persons, no FIR has been lodged and on the application of the petitioner filed under Section 173 (4) of the BNSS, 2023, the order dated 08.07.2025 has been passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 48, Barabanki to register F.I.R. and investigate the issue strictly in accordance with law. 5. In the aforesaid application mainly the allegations have been levelled relating to forgery, perjury, & fraud etc. but the FIR has been lodged under Sections 3 (5), 352, 351 (2) of the BNS, for the reason best known to the Investigating Officer. 6. Shri Mishra, learned counsel for petitioner has stated that the Investigating Officer has not recorded the statement of the informant. 7. Shri S.N. Tilahari, learned A.G.A. for the State has produced instruction/letter dated 13.08.2025 and the same is taken on record. 8. On the aforesaid instructions, the investigation has been completed and final report no. 033 of 2025 has been filed before the supervisory authority and the same may be sent to the court concerned very soon. 9. Shri Mishra, learned counsel for petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court towards Annexure No. SA-1, which is an order dated 13.08.2025 passed by the same trial court i.e., learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 48, Barabanki showing its displeasure for the manner under which FIR has been lodged. 10. The learned trial court concerned has directed that the status of investigation be apprised to the court and if the charge sheet/final report has been filed, the same be also produced before the court concerned. 11. As per aforesaid instructions and submissions made by Shri Tilahari, learned A.G.A. for the State, final report dated 12.08.2025 has been submitted before the supervisory authority but the same has not been sent to the court concerned by 13.08.2025. 12. If the Supervisory Authority sent the aforesaid final report before the court concerned, it is needless to say that the court concerned may pass CRLP No. 8014 of 2025 2 appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law. At the same time, it is incumbent upon the supervisory authority to go into the contents and material of the final report before sending the same to the court concerned and if he/she finds that the investigation is not proper or FIR has not been registered under proper sections any appropriate order may be passed by the supervisory authority. In any case, at this stage the prayers prayed in the writ petition may not be granted but this Court legitimately expect that supervisory authority or court concerned may do the needful strictly in accordance with law. 13. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to provide certified copy of the order of this Court to the supervisory authority along with an application placing his grievance and if the final report is produced before the court concerned, the petitioner may also file an application before the court concerned placing his grievance and any appropriate order may be passed by the competent authority/court, as the case may be. 14. With the aforesaid observations/directions petition is disposed of finally. September 19, 2025 Virendra CRLP No. 8014 of 2025 3 (Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench