HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3735 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant, Sri S.P.Tiwari, learned AGA appearing for the State and perused the records. 2. The present appeal has been filed for the following main relief:- "It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order dated 25.09.2025 passed by Special Judge SC/ST Act, Ambedkarnagar in Misc Case No.345/2025 u/s 173(4) of BNSS,2023, police station- Jalalpur, District-Ambedkarnagar And further be pleased to direct the concern authority/ police station to register the case against the opposite party no. 02 to 06 in the interest of justice." 3. By means of the present appeal, the appellant has assailed the order dated 25.09.2025 passed by Special Judge SC/ST Act, Ambedkarnagar in Misc Case No.345/2025 ( in short 'trial court'). Vide impugned order dated 25.09.2025, the trial court rejected the application preferred by the appellant under Section 173(4) BNSS. 4. The brief facts of the case are as under:- (i) On 25.08.2025 at about 7 pm the application under Section 173(4) of BNSS was preferred against the employees of electricity /hydel department namely Amit Kumar Patel, Dharmendra Yadav, Mukesh Maurya, Samar Bahadur Singh, Shard Mishra, impleaded as opposite party no(s). 3 to 7 ( in short 'side opposite'). (ii) The side opposite asked the appellant to deposit the due amount i.e. Rs. 6,000/-. (iii) For which the appellant sought time. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Bhimbahadur Singh, Jay Prakash Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Ram Anand Paswan .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 6 Others .....Respondent(s) (iv) The side opposite thereafter hurled abuses and also made casteist remarks against the appellant. (v) The appellant was also assaulted by side opposite with kicks and fists and they also slapped the appellant. (vi) The son of appellant namely Radharaman was also pushed to earth by the side opposite. (vii) The side opposite also took away the cable amounting to Rs. 2,000/- and also threaten the appellant to life. (viii) After considering the Police report, the aforesaid application was rejected by the trial court. (ix) According to Police report the side opposite went to the shop of the appellant on 25.08.2025 where the appellant committed crime and the said incident was reported by Amit Kumar Patel/opposite party no.3 and based upon the written report an FIR dated 26.08.2025 was registered as Case Crime No. 383/2025 under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3) BNS. 4. In the aforesaid background of the case, the present appeal has been filed impeaching the order dated 25.09.2025. 5. Learned Counsel for the appellant says that trial court has failed to consider the facts in its true spirit. As such, the indulgence of this Court is required in the matter. 6. Sri S.P. Tiwari, learned A.G.A. submitted that order passed by the trial court is reasoned and speaking order. He further submitted that it is apparent from the material available on record including the Police report and the order under challenge that with oblique motive the appellant preferred an application under Section 173(4) of BNSS. Prayer is to dismiss the appeal. 7. Considered the aforesaid and perused the records. 8. For coming to the conclusion as to whether the impugned order is justified or not, this Court feels it appropriate to refer the relevant portion of order dated 25.09.2025, and the same reads as under:- "5. आवेदक का कथन है िक, "Šाथȃ की एक ɭकान ितराहा मंगुरािडला, थाना-जलालपुर, जनपद-अĞबेडकरनगर मȅ िĥथत है, उसका िबजली का कनेĆशनन Šाथȃ की पĕनी आशा देवी के नाम है। Šाथȃ अपनी माँ के इलाज मȅ 05 माह काफी Dzĥत रहा और इलाज के िलए उसे बाहर जाना पíता था, िजस कारण वह िबजली का िबल नहȂ जमा कर पाया और िबल मु० 6,000/- ɳपये बकाया हो गया था। िदनांक 25.08.2025 को समय 07:00 बजे हाइिडल िवभाग, जलालपुर, अĞबेडकरनगर के िवǯुत कमȃ अिमत कु मार पटेल, धमȆęŝ यादव, मुके श मौयă, समर CRLA No. 3735 of 2025 2 बहाɭर िसह व शरद िमũ Šाथȃ की ɭकान पर आये और िबजली का बकाया िबल जमा करने को कहे। Šाथȃ ने उनसे दो िदन का समय मांगा तो सभी िवपWीगण Šाथȃ के ऊपर काफी गुĥसा होकर उसे माँ-बहन की गािलयाँ देने लगे और कहे िक मादरचोद साले पासी की जाित तुĞहारी हमेशा यही नौटंकी रहती है। Šाथȃ ने उęहȅ गािलयाँ देने से मना िकया तो अिमत कु मार, धमȆęŝ यादव, मुके श मौयă, समर बहाɭर िसह व शरद िमũ उसे लात-घूसा व थĚपí से मारे। उसका कु ताă फाí िदये। Šाथȃ का लíका राधारमन बीच-बचाव करना चाहा तो उसे भी धĆका मार कर िगरा िदये मु० 2,000/- ɴपये का िबजली का के िबल जबरदĥती काटकर उठा ले गये। लोगȋ की भीí देखकर Šाथȃ को जान से मारने की धमकी देकर चलȅ गये।" थाने की आćया के अनुसार आवेदक व उसके घरवालȋ DZारा िबजली कमăचारीगण के साथ मारपीट आिद की गयी। िजसके संबंध मȅ िबजली कमăचारी अिमत कु मार पटेल DZारा िलिखत Šाथăना पś देकर थाना ĥथानीय पर िदनांक 26.08.2025 को मु०अ०सं-383/2025 अęतगăत धारा-115(2), 352 व 351(3) बी०एन०एस० मȅ आवेदक राम आनęद व अęय के िवɳǪ पंजीकृ त कराया गया। Šाथȃ के कथनानुसार उसे चार-पाँच लोगȋ DZारा िमलकर मारा-पीटा गया परęतु उसे आयी। चोटȋ के सĞबęध मȅ पśावली पर कोई मेिडकल िरपोटă दािखल नहȂ िकया गया है, िजससे ĥपǸ हो सके िक िवपWीगण के मारने से उसे िकस Šकार की चोटȅ कािरत ɷई। 6. इस Šकार, पśावली पर उपलĜध थाने की आćया के अवलोकन से ĥपǸ होता है िक आवेदक व उसके पिरवार वालȋ के िवɳǪ िवपWी सं०-1 अिमत कु मार पटेल DZारा अिभयोग पंजीकृ त कराया गया है। ऐसा मȅ आवेदक DZारा पेशबंदी मȅ Šाथăना पś Šĥतुत िकया जाना Šतीत होता है। 7. ऐसी िĥथित मȅ Šाथăना पś के अवलोकन से िकसी संXेय अपराध का कािरत होना ŠथमɯǸया न पाये जाने के कारण Šĥतुत Šाथăना पś उपरोǘानुसार िनरĥत िकए जाने योĈय है। आदेश Šाथȃ राम आनęद पासवान DZारा Šĥतुत Šाथăना पś अęतगăत धारा-173 (4) बी०एन०एस०एस० िनरĥत िकया जाता है। पśावली िनयमानुसार दािखल अिभलेखागार हȋ।" 9. Upon due consideration of the facts including the order of trial court dated 25.09.2025, this Court finds that no interference is required in the matter. It is for the reason that (i) appellant preferred an application under Section 173(4) of BNSS in counterblast to the Case Crime No. 383/2025 under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3) BNS, registered on the written report submitted by opposite party no.3, according to which the appellant alongwith his family members assaulted the officers/officials of electricity/hydel department and (ii) To support the allegations regarding injury sustained, medical evidence was not placed on record, which indicates that the story narrated by the appellant in the application under Section 173(4) BNSS, was concocted story. 9. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed. Costs made easy. November 19, 2025 Jyoti/- CRLA No. 3735 of 2025 3 (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench