Saburul Nisha vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

Saburul Nisha vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim directions only: notice issued to opposite party nos. 2 to 5 (steps within a week); learned A.G.A. directed to ensure service through the S.H.O. concerned; matter listed on 28.07.2025; office directed to furnish a copy of the order to the learned A.G.A. Revision remains pending; no merits determination made.

Issue for consideration

Whether the learned Special Judge erred in treating the revisionist's application under Section 173(4) of the BNSS, 2023 as a complaint instead of directing registration of an FIR. +1 more

Court's answer

The Court held that the matter requires consideration and issued notice to opposite party nos. 2 to 5, with steps to be taken within a week and service to be ensured by the learned A.G.A. through the S.H.O. concerned; the matter was listed on 28.07.2025. No final view was expressed on the legality of treating the application as a complaint or on the power to direct medical examination.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal revision under Sections 438/442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (equivalent to Sections 397/401 Cr.P.C.) against the judgment and order dated 05.04.2025 of the Special Judge (POCSO Act, 2012), District Pratapgarh, in Criminal Misc. Case No. 19 of 2025 (P.S. Jethwara), whereby the revisionist's application under Section 173(4) BNSS was treated as a complaint. The complaint alleged that on 15.11.2024 the revisionist's minor daughter (aged about 15 years) was abducted midway while being escorted home and repeatedly sexually assaulted in a grove by Akbar Ali, Sazid Ali, Shoeb Khan, Salman and Talib Khan till she lost consciousness, and that the accused threatened the family against lodging an FIR; the FIR was allegedly not lodged despite approaches to the police and a letter to the Superintendent of Police, whereupon the application under Section 173(3) BNSS was registered as a complaint case. Counsel for the revisionist contended that the trial court was bound to direct registration of an FIR given the nature of the allegations and the need for medical examination, and that even in a complaint case it had power to direct the prosecutrix's medical examination. Alok Mathur, J. held that the matter requires consideration, issued notice to opposite party nos. 2 to 5 returnable on 28.07.2025, and directed the A.G.A. to ensure service through the S.H.O. concerned. Interim order; no final determination on merits.

Court No. - 12

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 568 of 2025

Revisionist :- Saburul Nisha

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Civil Sectt. Lko. And 4 Others

Counsel for Revisionist :- Prabhakar Pandey,Ajay Kumar Ojha,Pooja Srivastava,Prabhat Kumar Ojha,Sujit Kumar Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

Heard Mr. Prabhat Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

By means of the present criminal revision under Section 438/442 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (397/401 Cr.P.C.) the revisionist has challenged the judgment and order dated 05.04.2025 passed by learned Special Judge (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012) in Criminal Misc. Case No. 19 of 2025, Police Station Jethwara, District Pratapgarh wherein the application of the revisionist under Section 173 (4) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been treated to be a complaint.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for revisionist that in the complaint it was stated that on 15.11.2024 at about 7:00 p.m., minor daughter of the complainant aged about 15 years was reprimanded by the parents due to which she left the house and went to the house of her friend. The father of her friend stated that he would leave the prosecutrix to her home and accordingly the revisionist accompanied the father of friend in the vehicle but he stopped the vehicle midway and other persons of the same village namely, Akbar Ali, Sazid Ali, Shoeb Khan, Salman and Talib Khan under the garb of taking the

prosecutrix to her house, took her to a grove where they repeatedly sexually assaulted her till she was left unconscious and at 4:00 a.m. she regained her senses, she somehow reached her home and informed her parents about the said incident. It has further been stated that on the very next day, all the accused persons came to the prosecutrix home and threatened her not to lodge the FIR otherwise they will further harass the entire family. Despite approaching the police and writing the letter to the Superintendent of Police, the FIR was not lodged and consequently, her application under Section 173 (3) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been registered as complaint case.

It is further stated that considering the nature of allegations and also requirement of conducting medical examination, it was incumbent upon the trial court to have directed for registration of FIR and even if it was treated as a complaint, the court had sufficient power to make the prosecutrix medically examined.

In light of the above, the matter requires consideration.

Issue notice to opposite party nos. 2 to 5. Steps to be taken within a week.

Learned A.G.A. is directed to ensure service of notice upon opposite party no. 2 to 5 through S.H.O. concerned.

List on 28.07.2025.

Office is directed to furnish copy of this order to learned A.G.A. for the State for necessary compliance..

(Alok Mathur, J.)

Order Date :- 20.5.2025 Virendra

Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench