HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 9939 of 2026 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J. 1. Notice has not been issued to O.P. No.2. 2. Heard Shri Aditya Kumar Kushwaha, learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA for the State. 3. The present criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant against the impugned order dated 07.08.2026 passed by learned Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Kaushambi in Misc. Application No.118 of 2026 (Bablu vs. Shobha Nishad and Others), Police Station- Mehawaghat, District- Kaushambi, by which the complaint filed by the appellant under Section 173(4) BNSS has been treated into complaint. 4. An application under Section 173(4) of the BNSS was moved by the complainant, Bablu, against the accused-opposite party no.2, Shobha Nishad, and two-three unknown persons. The allegation contained in the application is that the accused-opposite party, Shobha Nishad, along with two-three unknown persons, caused injuries to the complainant and also hurled caste-based abusive words at him. It is further submitted that the police challaned the accused persons under Sections 173, 135 and 126 of the BNSS. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant was assaulted on 12.06.2026 by opposite party no. 2, Shobha Nishad, along with 3–4 unknown persons, who also used caste-related abusive language against him. The appellant was medically examined on the same day and, despite approaching the police authorities and thereafter the Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Aditya Kumar Kushwaha Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Bablu .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) Superintendent of Police, no FIR was registered. It is submitted that the identity of the unknown persons can be ascertained only through police investigation and, therefore, the learned court below erred in mechanically treating the application under Section 173(4) BNSS as a complaint. The impugned order dated 07.08.2026, having been passed without proper consideration of the material facts and circumstances, is liable to be set aside. 6. Learned AGA submits that the learned court below has rightly exercised its judicial discretion in treating the application under Section 173(4) BNSS as a complaint. The allegations contained in the application are specific and the material facts are within the knowledge of the appellant; hence, registration of an FIR and police investigation is not mandatory in every such case. The learned court has considered the allegations and the applicable legal principles before passing the impugned order. It is therefore submitted that no illegality or infirmity is made out warranting interference by this Court. 7. Considering the averments made in the application under Section 173(4) of the BNSS, the learned trial court, in the light of the relevant case law referred to in the impugned order, treated the application as a complaint. It is settled that the Special Court/Magistrate is not bound to direct registration of an FIR in every case merely on the filing of an application under Section 173(4) of the BNSS. Where the material facts are within the specific knowledge of the complainant and the allegations can be appropriately dealt with by treating the application as a complaint, the court is not required to mechanically direct registration of an FIR. In the present case, the learned trial court has considered the allegations and the material on record, applied its judicial mind, and, for the reasons recorded in the impugned order, rightly treated the application as a complaint. No illegality or infirmity is therefore found in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. 8. 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 CRLA No. 9939 of 2026 2 the appellant filed under Section 173(4) BNSS as a complaint. The impugned order dated 07.08.2026 does not suffer from any illegality, perversity or infirmity warranting interference by this Court. 9. The appeal, being devoid of merits, is accordingly dismissed. 10. Registrar (Compliance) is directed to serve a copy of this order by FAX/e-mail to the court concerned through District & Sessions Judge, Kaushambi within 48 hours. September 30, 2026 Ankit. CRLA No. 9939 of 2026 3 (Santosh Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANKIT VISHWAKARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad