HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4329 of 2026 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 Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Shriprakash Shrivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : Anupam Bindra, G.A., Nainshi Srivastava, Narendra Nath Tripathi, Puneet Bhadauria Ramashrya Prasad .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. And 7 Others .....Respondent(s) 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 2 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. September 8, 2026 Ankit. CRLA No. 4329 of 2026 3 (Santosh Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANKIT VISHWAKARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad