Short answer. Yes. The Rules of Court require the complaint or information to state the accused's name and surname or any appellation or nickname by which he has been or is known. If the name cannot be ascertained at all, the accused may be described under a fictitious name, with a statement that the true name is unknown.
What the law says
The complaint or information must state the name and surname of the accused or any appellation or nickname by which he has been or is known.
Rule 110, Section 7 — Name of the accused. Read the full provision →
The name is a means, not the point
The rule's design tells you what it is really after: identifying a person. The charge must state the name and surname of the accused or any appellation or nickname by which he has been or is known. The alternatives are built in from the start — a formal name is the ordinary way of pointing at someone, but an alias or a nickname the person actually goes by serves the same function. What matters is that the complaint or information singles out a specific human being as the one being charged, well enough that there is no doubt who must answer.
When even the nickname is unknown
The rule goes further for the truly unidentified suspect: If his name cannot be ascertained, he must be described under a fictitious name with a statement that his true name is unknown. This is the origin of charges against a placeholder — an invented name standing in for a real but unnamed person, coupled with a description. Two requirements ride together here: the fictitious name, and the express statement that the true name is unknown. The device exists so that prosecution is not paralysed merely because the offender's identity has not yet been put to a name.
What happens when the true name surfaces
The rule closes the loop: If the true name of the accused is thereafter disclosed by him or appears in some other manner to the court, such true name shall be inserted in the complaint or information and record. Notice the two routes — the accused may disclose it, or it may appear in some other manner. Either way, insertion of the true name is mandatory. The case that began against a nickname or a placeholder continues against the now-named person; the correction of the record is the completion of the charge, not the start of a new one.
If you were charged under the wrong label
Being charged under a nickname you actually use is what the rule expressly permits, so that alone is not a defect. What deserves attention is misidentification — if you are not the person the description and the evidence point to, or the alias in the charge is not and never was yours, raise it through counsel at the earliest opportunity so the question of identity is put on record before trial hardens around it. Do not simply ignore the case on the theory that a wrong or invented name makes it void; the rule's own mechanism is correction of the name, and the proceedings can move while you stay silent.